From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rodriguez v. Henry

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jun 3, 2022
2:20-cv-01659 JAM DMC (PC) (E.D. Cal. Jun. 3, 2022)

Opinion

2:20-cv-01659 JAM DMC (PC)

06-03-2022

JULIAN RODRIGUEZ, Plaintiff, v. D. HENRY, et al., Defendants.


ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO MODIFY THE SCHEDULING ORDER

DENNIS M. COTA UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Defendants Crume and Henry (Defendants) move for administrative relief under Civil Local Rule 233 and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16 to modify the scheduling order and extend Defendants' discovery cut-off and dispositive-motion deadlines by ninety days. As this is Defendants' first request for an extension/modification of the scheduling deadlines, the Court considers Defendants' motion ex parte pursuant to Local Rule 144(c).

Good cause appearing based on counsel's declaration indicating the need for additional time to arrange for Plaintiff's remote deposition from Mazatlan, Mexico, IT IS ORDERED that Defendants' motion is granted. The March 3, 2022, scheduling order is modified as follows: the parties may conduct discovery until September 6, 2022, and the deadline for filing of dispositive motions is extended to December 5, 2022.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Rodriguez v. Henry

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jun 3, 2022
2:20-cv-01659 JAM DMC (PC) (E.D. Cal. Jun. 3, 2022)
Case details for

Rodriguez v. Henry

Case Details

Full title:JULIAN RODRIGUEZ, Plaintiff, v. D. HENRY, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Jun 3, 2022

Citations

2:20-cv-01659 JAM DMC (PC) (E.D. Cal. Jun. 3, 2022)