(PC) Brooks v. Arrizola ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 LAMAR BROOKS, 1:20-cv-00476-JLT-GSA-PC 10 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT ARREZOLA’S MOTION TO MODIFY 11 vs. SCHEDULING ORDER (ECF No. 34.) 12 ARRIZOLA, et al., ORDER EXTENDING DISPOSITIVE 13 Defendants. MOTIONS FILING DEADLINE FOR ALL PARTIES 14 NEW DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS FILING 15 DEADLINE: 16 AUGUST 17, 2022 17 I. BACKGROUND 18 Plaintiff Lamar Brooks is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with this civil rights action 19 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On January 10, 2022, the Court issued a Discovery and Scheduling 20 Order establishing pretrial deadlines for the parties, including a deadline for filing dispositive 21 motions of August 10, 2022. (ECF No. 25.). 22 On August 10, 2022, Defendant Arrezola1 filed a motion to modify the Discovery and 23 Scheduling Order. (ECF No. 34.) 24 II. MOTION TO MODIFY SCHEDULING ORDER 25 Modification of a scheduling order requires a showing of good cause, Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 16(b), and good cause requires a showing of due diligence, Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, 27 28 1 Sued as Arrizola. 1 Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992). To establish good cause, the party seeking the 2 modification of a scheduling order must generally show that even with the exercise of due 3 diligence, they cannot meet the requirement of the order. Id. The Court may also consider the 4 prejudice to the party opposing the modification. Id. If the party seeking to amend the scheduling 5 order fails to show due diligence the inquiry should end and the Court should not grant the motion 6 to modify. Zivkovic v. Southern California Edison, Co., 302 F.3d 1080, 1087 (9th Cir. 2002). 7 Defendant Arrezola requests an extension of the dispositive motions filing deadline until 8 August 17, 2022. 9 The Court finds good cause to extend the dispositive motions filing deadline. Defense 10 counsel has shown that she was diligent in attempting to meet the deadlines established in the 11 Court’s Discovery and Scheduling Order, but was unable to complete the dispositive motion in 12 this case before the deadline expired. Therefore, Defendant Arrezola’s motion to modify the 13 Discovery and Scheduling Order shall be granted. 14 III. CONCLUSION 15 Based on the foregoing and good cause having been presented to the court, IT IS 16 HEREBY ORDERED that: 17 1. Defendant Arrezola’s motion to modify the court’s Discovery and Scheduling 18 Order, filed on August 10, 2022, is GRANTED; 19 2. The deadline for filing dispositive motions in this case is extended from August 20 10, 2022 until August 17, 2022, for all parties to this action; and 21 3. All other provisions of the court’s January 10, 2022 Discovery and Scheduling 22 Order remain the same. 23 IT IS SO ORDERED. 24 25 Dated: August 12, 2022 /s/ Gary S. Austin UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 26 27 28