(PC) Sutton v. Giessner ( 2019 )

1 XAVIER BECERRA, State Bar No. 118517 Attorney General of California 2 PHILLIP L. ARTHUR, State Bar No. 238339 Supervising Deputy Attorney General 3 ERIK A. GUTIERREZ, State Bar No. 273837 Deputy Attorney General 4 1300 I Street, Suite 125 P.O. Box 944255 5 Sacramento, CA 94244-2550 Telephone: (916) 210-7340 6 Fax: (916) 324-5203 E-mail: Erik.Gutierrez@doj.ca.gov 7 Attorneys for Defendants G. Giessner and N. Guzman 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SACRAMENTO DIVISION 11 12 13 KARIMI SUTTON, 2:16-cv-02369 KJM EFB 14 Plaintiff, STIPULATION TO MODIFY SCHEDULING ORDER 15 v. 16 Judge: The Honorable Edmund F. G. GIESSNER, et al., Brennan 17 Trial Date: Not set Defendants. Action Filed: September 23, 2016 18 19 20 Pursuant to Local Rule 143, the parties stipulate and ask the Court to Order that the 21 scheduling order entered on April 2, 2019 (ECF No. 20) be modified as follows: (1) Plaintiff’s 22 deposition shall be completed on or before September 9, 2019; (2) any motions necessary to 23 compel discovery shall be filed on or before September 16, 2019; (3) dispositive motions shall be 24 filed on or before December 9, 2019; and (4) the Court will schedule pretrial proceedings, if 25 necessary, upon the resolution of any pretrial motions filed. 26 “The district court is given broad discretion in supervising the pretrial phase of litigation.” 27 Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 607 (9th Cir. 1992) (citation and internal 28 quotation marks omitted). Rule 16(b) provides that “[a] schedule may be modified only for good 1 cause and with the judge’s consent.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). “The schedule may be modified 2 ‘if it cannot reasonably be met despite the diligence of the party seeking the extension.’” Zivkovic 3 v. Southern California Edison Co., 302 F.3d 1080, 1087 (9th Cir. 2002) (quoting Johnson, 975 4 F.2d at 607). 5 Good cause exists for this extension. Plaintiff’s deposition was initially scheduled for July 6 9, 2019. In June 2019, Defendants’ counsel became aware that the Law Offices of Marc 7 Grossman intended to substitute into this case as counsel for Plaintiff Karimi Sutton. The 8 substitution of attorney was completed and approved by the Court on July 10, 2019. (ECF No. 9 25.) Due to the appearance of Plaintiff’s counsel, Defendants voluntarily agreed to move 10 Plaintiff’s deposition to August 2, 2019. Defendants’ and Plaintiff’s counsel arranged to appear 11 for the August 2, 2019 deposition by video teleconference. Plaintiff would appear for the 12 deposition in-person at his correctional institution, Substance Abuse Treatment Facility and State 13 Prison, Corcoran (SATF-CSP, Corcoran). 14 On the morning of August 2, 2019, approximately twenty minutes before the video 15 teleconference deposition was set to begin, the parties were made aware that the Internet 16 connection at Plaintiff’s correctional institution, SATF-CSP, Corcoran was and had been down 17 since 11 p.m. on August 1, 2019. As Plaintiff’s counsel is located in Upland, California, and 18 Defendants’ counsel is located in Sacramento, California, there was no feasible way for either 19 counsel to appear in-person on short notice. Counsel waited for approximately forty-five minutes 20 after the scheduled start-time to see if the Internet connection would be fixed, but it was not. 21 Counsel jointly agreed to postpone the deposition, complete this stipulation, and move the Court 22 for an Order to modify the scheduling conference. Additionally, Plaintiff’s counsel is scheduled 23 for a pre-paid vacation from August 4, 2019 to the close of the discovery period, which prevents 24 the parties from completing Plaintiff’s deposition by the Court ordered deadline of August 9, 25 2019. Accordingly, the parties request an additional 30 days to complete Plaintiff’s deposition. 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// 1 Accordingly, the parties hereby agree and stipulate as follows: 2 Plaintiff’s deposition shall be complete on or before September 9, 2019; 3 2. Any motions necessary to compel discovery shall be filed on or before 4 September 16, 2019; 5 3. Dispositive motions shall be filed on or before December 9, 2019; and 6 4. The Court will schedule pretrial proceedings, if necessary, upon the resolution of any 7 | pretrial motions filed. 8 || Dated: August 5, 2019 Respectfully submitted, 9 XAVIER BECERRA Attorney General of California 10 PHILLIP L. ARTHUR i Supervising Deputy Attorney General 12 /s/ Erik A, Gutierrez ERIK A. GUTIERREZ 13 Deputy Attorney General Attorneys for Defendants G. Giessner, and N. 14 Guzman 15 || Dated: August 5, 2019 16 /s/ Marc Grossman MARC GROSSMAN 17 LAW OFFICES OF MARC GROSSMAN 18 Attorneys for Plaintiff Karimi Sutton 19 IT IS SO ORDERED. The discovery and scheduling deadlines shall be modified as 20 || follows: (1) Plaintiffs deposition shall be complete on or before September 9, 2019; (2) any 21 || motions necessary to compel discovery shall be filed on or before September 16, 2019; 22 || (3) dispositive motions shall be filed on or before December 9, 2019; (4) the Court will schedule 23 || pretrial proceedings, if necessary, upon the resolution of any pretrial motions filed. 24 | Dated: August 7, 2019 25 Edmund F. Brennan 27 United States Magistrate Judge 28 SA2019100656/13978673.docx