(PC) Muniz v. Pfeiffer ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CELINA MUNIZ, 1:19-cv-00233-JLT-BAK (GSA) – PC 12 Plaintiff, ORDER GIVING FULL EFFECT TO STIPULATION TO AMEND SCHEDULING 13 v. CONFERENCE ORDER 14 PFEIFFER, et al., (ECF No. 71.) 15 Defendants. 16 17 Celina Muniz (“Plaintiff”) is proceeding with counsel in this wrongful death/civil rights 18 action against employees of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. 19 On January 6, 2022, due to the elevation of Bakersfield Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. 20 Thurston to District Judge, the court issued an order temporarily referring this case to Magistrate 21 Judge Gary S. Austin until such time as a new Bakersfield magistrate judge is appointed. (ECF 22 No. 66.) 23 On June 3, 2022, a stipulation to amend the July 9, 2021 Scheduling Order was filed with 24 the Court. (ECF No. 71.) 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 Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992). To establish good cause, the party seeking the 28 modification of a scheduling order must generally show that even with the exercise of due 1 diligence, they cannot meet the requirement of the order. Id. If the party seeking to amend the 2 scheduling order fails to show due diligence the inquiry should end and the Court should not 3 grant the motion to modify. Zivkovic v. Southern California Edison, Co., 302 F.3d 1080, 1087 4 (9th Cir. 2002). 5 Here, in the stipulation signed by counsel of all parties appearing in this action, the parties 6 seek to modify the non-expert discovery cut-off date in the Scheduling Conference Order with 7 the understanding that the parties will not propound additional written discovery. The parties 8 agree that they will set the depositions of the named parties during the week of July 18, 2022 to 9 be taken in Bakersfield, California and will meet and confer on the setting of non-party 10 depositions as well as any further fact discovery extension should an unforeseen issue arise for 11 either side. The parties also agree that a 120-day extension of the remaining deadlines in the 12 Scheduling Order would greatly assist the parties in completing discovery, retaining experts, 13 having further settlement discussions, and preparing for trial. The parties propose the following 14 dates: 15 From To 16 Expert Disclosure: 03/25/2022 07/22/2022 17 Supplemental Expert Disclosure: 04/22/2022 08/26/2022 18 Non-Expert Discovery Cut-off: 02/25/2022 08/31/2022 19 Expert Discovery Cut-off: 05/20/2022 09/30/2022 20 21 The Court finds good cause to approve the parties’ stipulation. Accordingly, IT IS 22 HEREBY ORDERED that the parties’ stipulation filed on June 3, 2022, is given full force and 23 effect as of the date it was filed. 24 IT IS SO ORDERED. 25 26 Dated: June 14, 2022 /s/ Gary S. Austin UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 27 28