(PC) Washington v. Sutton ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 ISAIAH WASHINGTON, 1:20-cv-00983-AWI-GSA-PC 11 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO MODIFY SCHEDULING 12 v. ORDER (ECF No. 37.) 13 SUTTON, et al., ORDER EXTENDING DEADLINE TO FILE 14 Defendants. EXHAUSTION MOTIONS FOR ALL PARTIES 15 New Deadline to File Exhaustion Motions: 16 August 24, 2022 17 18 I. BACKGROUND 19 Isaiah Washington (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 20 pauperis with this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This case now proceeds 21 against Defendants M. Sturges, O. Navarro, and J. Cornejo (“Defendants”) for use of excessive 22 force in violation of the Eighth Amendment. (ECF No. 1.) 1 23 On March 25, 2022, the court issued a Discovery and Scheduling Order establishing 24 pretrial deadlines for the parties, including an Exhaustion Motion Filing Deadline of June 25, 25 2022. (ECF No. 32.) On June 16, 2022, Defendants filed a motion to modify the Scheduling 26 Order. (ECF No. 37.) 27 1 On January 3, 2022, the Court issued an order for this case to proceed only with Plaintiff’s 28 excessive force claims against defendants Sturges, Navarro, and Cornejo, and dismissing all other claims and defendants. (ECF No. 25.) 1 II. MOTION TO MODIFY SCHEDULING ORDER 2 Modification of a scheduling order requires a showing of good cause, Fed. R. Civ. P. 3 16(b), and good cause requires a showing of due diligence, Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, 4 Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992). To establish good cause, the party seeking the 5 modification of a scheduling order must generally show that even with the exercise of due 6 diligence, they cannot meet the requirement of the order. Id. The court may also consider the 7 prejudice to the party opposing the modification. Id. If the party seeking to amend the scheduling 8 order fails to show due diligence the inquiry should end and the court should not grant the motion 9 to modify. Zivkovic v. Southern California Edison, Co., 302 F.3d 1080, 1087 (9th Cir. 2002). 10 The Court finds good cause to extend the deadline for the filing of exhaustion motions in 11 the Court’s Discovery and Scheduling Order to the date of August 24, 2022. Therefore, the 12 motion to modify the Scheduling Order filed by Defendants on June 16, 2022 shall be granted. 13 III. CONCLUSION 14 Based on the foregoing and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 15 1. Defendants’ motion to modify the Court’s Scheduling Order, filed on June 16, 16 2022, is GRANTED; 17 2. The deadline for filing exhaustion motions is extended from June 25, 2022 to 18 August 24, 2022 for all parties to this action; and 19 3. All other provisions of the court’s March 25, 2022 Discovery and Scheduling 20 Order remain the same. 21 IT IS SO ORDERED. 22 23 Dated: June 17, 2022 /s/ Gary S. Austin UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 24 25 26 27 28