(PC) Khouanmany v. Alencastre ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 VILAYCHITH KHOUANMANY, Case No. 2:17-cv-01326-TLN-JDP (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO MODIFY THE SUPPLEMENTAL 13 v. SCHEDULING ORDER 14 BEN ALENCASTRE, et al., ECF No. 172 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 Plaintiff is a federal prisoner alleging claims under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, 19 403 U.S. 388 (1971). She has filed a document that asks the court to extend all deadlines in this 20 case. ECF No. 172. The court construes plaintiff’s filing as a motion to modify the supplemental 21 discovery order to extend the deadlines for filing motions to compel discovery and dispositive 22 motions. In their response to plaintiff’s filing, defendants state that they do not oppose extending 23 those deadlines. ECF No. 173. 24 Since defendants do not oppose plaintiff’s motion to modify the scheduling order, her 25 motion will be granted. The court will also set a briefing scheduling on the two motions to 26 compel that plaintiff recently filed. See ECF Nos. 174 & 175. 27 28 1 Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that: 2 1. Plaintiff's December 27, 2021 filing, ECF No. 172, is construed as a motion to modify 3 | the supplemental scheduling order. 4 2. So construed, the motion, ECF No. 172, is granted. 5 3. The deadline to file motions to compel defendant Deppe to provide discovery is 6 | extended to February 3, 2022. 7 4. The deadline to file dispositive motions is extended to June 3, 2022. 8 5. Defendants shall file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to plaintiffs 9 | motions to compel, ECF Nos. 174 & 175, by no later than March 3, 2022. 10 6. Plaintiff may file a reply to defendants’ opposition, if any, on or before March 10, 11 | 2022. 12 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. 14 ( 4 ie — Dated: _ February 9, 2022 Q————. 15 JEREMY D. PETERSON 16 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28