Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_17-cv-00607/USCOURTS-caed-1_17-cv-00607-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

AUBREY LEE BROTHERS, II,

Plaintiff,

v.

CHITA BUENAFE, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:17-cv-00607-LJO-JDP

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION 

FOR EXTENSION OF TIME

ECF No. 43

ORDER DENYING PENDING 

SCHEDULING AND DISCOVERY 

MOTIONS

ECF Nos. 40, 42

Plaintiff moves for an extension of time to respond to defendants’ motion for summary 

judgment. For good cause shown, plaintiff’s motion is granted. ECF No. 43. Plaintiff shall have 

thirty days from the date of entry of this order to file his opposition to defendants’ motion.

The parties have also filed multiple motions regarding discovery and scheduling but have 

failed to confer before filing. See Fed R. Civ. P. 37; Local R. 144. It appears that defendants did 

not have plaintiff’s phone number, see ECF No. 40, but that plaintiff has since provided it, see

ECF Nos. 41, 42, 43. Therefore, the parties are directed to discuss whether they can come to an 

agreement regarding discovery and scheduling. Both parties’ pending motions regarding 

discovery and scheduling are denied without prejudice. ECF Nos. 40, 42.

Case 1:17-cv-00607-DAD-HBK Document 45 Filed 01/14/20 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 14, 2020 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

No. 204.

Case 1:17-cv-00607-DAD-HBK Document 45 Filed 01/14/20 Page 2 of 2