Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_11-cv-01125/USCOURTS-caed-2_11-cv-01125-12/pdf.json

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

---

Stipulation and Order to Modify Scheduling Order – Case No. 2:11-cv-1125-MCE-KJN-PC 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

Pursuant to Local Rule 143 the parties stipulate and ask the Court to Order that the 

previous scheduling orders entered in this matter (See ECF Nos. 36, 43, 50) be modified by 

extending the discovery and dispositive motions deadlines by an additional 60 days, to March 22, 

2014, and June 14, 2014, respectively.

Good cause exists for this extension. Many relevant documents to the case were delivered 

to the Plaintiff during the academic break for the UC Davis Civil Rights Clinic. The certified 

law students have only returned to school recently and have not had adequate time to review 

these documents and participate fully in the case. Additionally, the Plaintiff and Defendant 

Pomazal are currently resolving a discovery dispute regarding subpoena’s that the Plaintiff 

served on the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. In order to resolve this 

BRANDON ALEXANDER FERNANDEZ,

Plaintiff,

vs.

CALIFORNIA DEP’T OF CORR., et al., 

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. 2:11-cv-1125-MCE-KJN-PC

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO

MODIFY SCHEDULING ORDER

Case 2:11-cv-01125-MCE-KJN Document 55 Filed 01/22/14 Page 1 of 2
Stipulation and Order to Modify Scheduling Order – Case No. 2:11-cv-1125-MCE-KJN-PC 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

dispute, Plaintiff requires additional time to examine documents from the Office of the Inspector 

General (OIG). A preliminary review of the documents from the OIG indicates that the 

documents requested in the subpoenas will be relevant and necessary to the Plaintiff’s case. If 

discovery is closed then the Plaintiff will be unable to continue discovery should additional, 

relevant information be discovered in the documents.

For these reasons, the parties ask the Court to extend the discovery deadline to March 22, 

2014, and the dispositive motion deadline to June 14, 2014.

Respectfully submitted,

Dated: January 21, 2014 /S/ Carter C. White

____________________

Carter C. White

Attorney for Plaintiff, Brandon A. Fernandez

Dated: January 21, 2014 R. Lawrence Bragg

____________________

R. Lawrence Bragg

Deputy Attorney General

Attorney for Defendants Cate, Pomazal, and Barnes

IT IS SO ORDERED. The discovery deadline is extended to March 22, 2014, and the 

dispositive motion deadline is extended to June 14, 2014.

Dated: January 22, 2014

fern1125.po(3)

Case 2:11-cv-01125-MCE-KJN Document 55 Filed 01/22/14 Page 2 of 2