(PC) Rosales v. Rios ( 2022 )

1 ROB BONTA, State Bar No. 202668 Attorney General of California 2 TYLER V. HEATH, State Bar No. 271478 Supervising Deputy Attorney General 3 SHIRAN ZOHAR, State Bar No. 287574 Deputy Attorney General 4 1300 I Street, Suite 125 P.O. Box 944255 5 Sacramento, CA 94244-2550 Telephone: (916) 210-6509 6 Fax: (916) 324-5205 E-mail: Shiran.Zohar@doj.ca.gov 7 Attorneys for Defendants Rios, Saeteurn, and Navarro 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SACRAMENTO DIVISION 11 12 13 MIGUEL ROSALES, 2:21-cv-01758-EFB 14 Plaintiff, JOINT MOTION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO STAY THE CASE AND 15 v. VACATE DISCOVERY AND SCHEDULING ORDER PENDING 16 RESOLUTION OF SETTLEMENT L. RIOS, et al., , CONFERENCE 17 Defendants. Judge: The Hon. Edmund F. Brennan 18 Trial Date: Not Set Action Filed: September 27, 2021 19 20 The parties jointly move for an order staying discovery and vacating the discovery and 21 dispositive-motion deadlines in the Court’s discovery and scheduling order (ECF No. 32), 22 pending resolution of the parties’ settlement conference scheduled for November 28, 2022. (ECF 23 No. 37.) A scheduling order may be modified upon a showing of good cause. Fed. R. Civ. P. 24 16(b). “The focus of the ‘good cause’ analysis under Rule 16(b) is the diligence of the party 25 seeking the amendment.” Johnson v. Mammoth Creations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 26 1992). As a secondary consideration, the court considers the degree of prejudice to the opposing 27 28 1 party. Id. Ultimately, the district court is given broad discretion to modify a scheduling order. 2 Id. at 607. 3 The parties have discussed the current scheduling order and this requested extension and 4 believe that the requested extension is both necessary and productive. Plaintiff’s attorney filed a 5 Fourth Amended Complaint (ECF No. 35) after the Court issued its discovery and scheduling 6 order, which sets the close of discovery as December 30, 2022, and requires all discovery 7 requests to be served no later than October 28, 2022 (ECF No. 32). The parties have begun 8 engaging in informal discovery, and will be participating in an early settlement conference on 9 November 28, 2022. (ECF No. 37.) The parties have been communicating in good faith, and 10 have agreed to exchange certain documents in advance of the settlement conference. In the event 11 the settlement conference is unsuccessful, the parties will need additional time to conduct 12 discovery and fully investigate the claims and defenses. 13 The parties therefore request that the Court vacate its current discovery and scheduling 14 order, stay the case, and reset the applicable deadlines pending resolution of the settlement 15 conference. This joint motion is not brought for purposes of delay or harassment, and is an 16 attempt to productively and expediently resolve this matter. 17 Dated: October 26, 2022 Respectfully Submitted, 18 ROB BONTA Attorney General of California 19 TYLER V. HEATH 20 Supervising Deputy Attorney General 21 /s/ Shiran Zohar 22 SHIRAN ZOHAR Deputy Attorney General 23 Attorneys for Defendants Rios, Saeteurn, and Navarro 24 25 /s/ Brody McBride 26 BRODY MCBRIDE Brody McBride Law 27 Attorneys for Plaintiff M. Rosales (approval to e-sign provided to Defendants’ counsel 28 on October 26, 2022) 1 2 Good cause appearing, the parties’ joint motion to stay discovery and vacate the current 3 || discovery and scheduling order is GRANTED. If necessary, the deadlines will be reset pending 4 || after resolution of the pending settlement conference. 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. 6 || Dated: October 27, 2022. 7 □□ PDEA 8 EDMUND F. BRENNAN 9 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28