(PC) Taylor v. Teragawa ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 KIRELL TAYLOR, Case No. 2:21-cv-1330 TLN KJN P 12 Plaintiff, [PROPOSED] ORDER 13 v. 14 15 S. TERAGAWA, 16 Defendant. 17 18 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding pro se. Defendant Teragawa requested an extension 19 of the pretrial motions filing deadline. 20 “The district court is given broad discretion in supervising the pretrial phase of litigation.” 21 Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 607 (9th Cir. 1992) (citation and internal 22 quotation marks omitted). Rule 16(b) provides that “[a] schedule may be modified only for good 23 cause and with the judge’s consent.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). “The schedule may be modified 24 ‘if it cannot reasonably be met despite the diligence of the party seeking the extension.’” 25 Zivkovic v. Southern California Edison Co., 302 F.3d 1080, 1087 (9th Cir. 2002) (quoting 26 Johnson, 975 F.2d at 607). 27 Having read and considered defendant’s motion and the declaration of defendant’s counsel 28 supporting the request, and good cause appearing, defendant’s motion is granted. ] Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. Defendant’s motion to modify the deadline to file all pretrial motions (ECF No. 36) is 3 || granted; and 4 2. The deadline for filing pretrial motions is extended to December 5, 2022. In all other 5 || respects, the discovery and scheduling order (ECF No. 28) remains in effect. 6 | Dated: October 24, 2022 Foci) Aharon 8 KENDALL J. NE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 9 10 | Aayl1330.16b 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28