Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-00714/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-00714-19/pdf.json

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

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TIO DINERO SESSOMS,

Plaintiff,

 v.

DR. DARRIN BRIGHT,

Defendant. /

No. C 13-00714 WHA 

ORDER RE PLAINTIFF’S

PROPOSED SCHEDULE

In this prisoner civil rights case, in which plaintiff is represented by pro bono counsel, an

order denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment in December 2015. At that time, a

second case management order issued, setting a trial date of May 31, 2016. Seven weeks before

trial, plaintiff filed a motion to continue the trial date to February 2017. The reason given was

that lead plaintiff’s counsel (a junior lawyer) was having complications with her pregnancy and

would not be able to try the case this May. Accordingly, an order granted the trial continuance. 

Now, having already delayed the trial by several months, plaintiff moves to completely

reopen discovery and set a new case management schedule with new dates for amendment of

pleadings, fact discovery, initial disclosures, and dispositive motions. It is far too late in the case

to hit the reset button and plaintiff has not shown good cause to amend the operative scheduling

order. The only reason we are not beginning trial this month is because of plaintiff’s counsel’s

medical issues. Accordingly, plaintiff’s motion to set a new scheduling order and reopen

discovery is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 13, 2016. __________________________

WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:13-cv-00714-WHA Document 127 Filed 05/13/16 Page 1 of 1