Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-01538/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-01538-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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 – FRESNO DIVISION

J.P., et al.,

Plaintiff,

v.

CITY OF PORTERVILLE, et al.,

Defendant.

 /

CASE NO. 1:09-cv-01538-AWI-SKO

ORDER ON REQUEST FOR 

MODIFICATION OF SCHEDULE 

(Docket No. 21)

On July 16, 2010, the parties filed a stipulated request that the scheduling deadlines in the

case be extended. This request did not provide any reasons or cause for modifying the schedule and

the request was denied. On July 24, 2010, the parties renewed their stipulated request for an

extension of scheduling deadlines in the case. This request was accompanied by a Declaration of

Dale K. Galipo stating reasons for the request including workload considerations of counsel and the

parties' and witnesses' availability. 

The parties have proposed the following extensions:

Deadline Initial Date: Requested Date:

1. Non-Expert Discovery Cut-Off: September 1, 2010 November 19, 2010

2. Expert Disclosures: November 15, 2010 December 3, 2010

3. Non-Dispositive Motion Filing: November 17, 2010 December 17, 2010

1

Case 1:09-cv-01538-AWI-SKO Document 22 Filed 07/29/10 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

4. Non-Dispositive Motion Hearing: December 10, 2010 January 7, 2011 

5. Expert Discovery Cut-Off November 11, 2010 January 14, 2011

6. Dispositive Motion Filing: December 17, 2010 January 21, 2011

7. Dispositive Motion Hearing: January 18, 2011 February 11, 2011

8. Pre Trial Conference March 4, 2011 March 4, 2011

9. Trial April 12, 2011 April 11, 2011

While the parties have provided reasons to extend the deadlines, most of the extended

deadlines proposed by counsel cannot be accommodated by the Court given the existing pre-trial

conference date and the trial date. The Court notes, for example, that the proposed dispositive

motion filing deadline is January 21, 2011, which leaves less than 28 days (as is required for proper

notice of a motion) before the proposed hearing deadline of February 11, 2011. Further, the

proposed dispositivemotion hearing deadline is onlythreeweeks before the pre-trial conference date

of March 4, 2011. 

The request that the Court can accommodate, given the existing trial date, is to extend the

Non-Expert Discovery Cut-Off date to November 10, 2010. The Court notes that the parties'

proposed date of November 19, 2010, would cause the discovery deadline to expire after the nondispositive motion filing deadline. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

1. The parties' request for an extension of the non-expert discovery deadline is

GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART; the non-expert discovery deadline

shall be extended to November 10, 2010; and

2. The parties' request for other deadline extensions is DENIED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 29, 2010 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto 

ie14hj UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2

Case 1:09-cv-01538-AWI-SKO Document 22 Filed 07/29/10 Page 2 of 2