(PC) McBounds v. Clays ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MARK MCBOUNDS, No. 2:19-cv-2208 KJM KJN P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND REVISED SCHEDULING ORDER 14 D. CLAYS, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding pro se. On April 10, 2023, defendants filed a 18 second motion to modify the discovery and scheduling order. Plaintiff again failed to respond to 19 written discovery, and defendants seek to vacate their discovery deadline and to vacate the 20 pretrial motions deadline until after the court rules on defendants’ motion to compel discovery, 21 filed concurrently with the motion to modify. The prior scheduling order was modified to allow 22 plaintiff additional time to respond to written discovery requests, which to date have not been 23 forthcoming. 24 “The district court is given broad discretion in supervising the pretrial phase of litigation.” 25 Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 607 (9th Cir. 1992) (citation and internal 26 quotation marks omitted). Rule 16(b) provides that “[a] schedule may be modified only for good 27 cause and with the judge’s consent.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). “The schedule may be modified 28 ‘if it cannot reasonably be met despite the diligence of the party seeking the extension.’” 1 |} Zivkovic v. Southern California Edison Co., 302 F.3d 1080, 1087 (9th Cir. 2002) (quoting 2 | Johnson, 975 F.2d at 607). 3 Good cause appearing, defendants’ second motion is granted. Plaintiff is required to file 4 || an opposition or statement of nonopposition to the pending motion to compel discovery. L.R. 5 || 230(1). Plaintiff was previously cautioned that he is required to cooperate in discovery, and his 6 || failure to do so may result in the issuance of sanctions, including a recommendation that this 7 || action be terminated. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(b)(2)(A) (sanctions may be imposed for failure to 8 || comply with a discovery order); Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(d)(3) (sanctions may be imposed for failure to 9 || serve answers to interrogatories or to respond to request for production of documents). 10 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 11 1. Defendants’ motion to modify the discovery and scheduling order (ECF No. 53) is 12 | granted; 13 2. Defendants’ deadline for completing discovery is extended until the court rules on their 14 || motion to compel discovery; and 15 3. The July 3, 2023 pretrial motions deadline is vacated, and will be rescheduled, if 16 || appropriate, following the ruling on defendants’ motion to compel discovery. In all other 17 || respects, the October 26, 2022 discovery and scheduling order (ECF No. 49) remains in effect. 18 || Dated: April 12, 2023 " Aectl Aharon 20 KENDALL J. NE Imebo2208.16b2 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28