Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-01963/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-01963-7/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

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARK A. JONES,

Plaintiff,

vs.

S. NIEHUS, et al., 

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

1:12cv01963 LJO DLB PC

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S 

MOTION TO MODIFY THE DISCOVERY 

AND SCHEDULING ORDER

(Document 43)_

Plaintiff Mark A. Jones (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1983. The action is proceeding on 

Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint for First Amendment retaliation against Defendant A. 

Maxfield.

Pursuant to the most recent scheduling modification, the dispositive motion deadline was 

February 29, 2016.1

Defendant Maxfield filed the instant motion to extend the dispositive motion deadline to 

March 4, 2016. The Court deems the matter suitable for decision without an opposition. Local 

Rule 230(l).

///

///

 

1 The deadline was actually February 27, 2016, a Saturday.

Case 1:12-cv-01963-LJO-DLB Document 44 Filed 03/01/16 Page 1 of 2
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

DISCUSSION

Modification of the pretrial scheduling order requires a showing of good cause. Fed. R. 

Civ. P. 16(b)(4). “The schedule may be modified ‘if it cannot reasonably be met despite the 

diligence of the party seeking the extension.’” Zivkovic v. Southern California Edison Co., 302 

F.3d 1080, 1087 (9th Cir. 2002) (quoting Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 

607 (9th Cir. 1992)). “If the party seeking the modification ‘was not diligent, the inquiry should 

end’ and the motion to modify should not be granted.” Id.

Here, Defendant requests an extension of the dispositive motion deadline by four days, to 

March 4, 2016, based on counsel’s work demands. Good cause appearing, the motion is 

GRANTED. The Court extends the dispositive motion deadline to March 4, 2016.

 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 1, 2016 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:12-cv-01963-LJO-DLB Document 44 Filed 03/01/16 Page 2 of 2