Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-01586/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-01586-5/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SACRAMENTO DIVISION

DeMARREA McCOY-GORDON,

Plaintiff,

v.

HERNANDEZ,

Defendant.

Case No. 2:19-cv-1586 JAM KJN P

ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION TO 

MODIFY SCHEDULING ORDER AND 

STAYING DISCOVERY

Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel. On March 4, 2020, defendant filed 

an ex parte1application for continuance and resetting of the discovery deadline and dispositive 

motion deadline, and also sought a protective order staying discovery due to the pendency of 

defendant’s motion for summary judgment based on plaintiff’s alleged failure to exhaust 

administrative remedies before filing this action. 

////

1

 Although defendant’s counsel moves ex parte, counsel declares that he spoke with 

plaintiff by telephone on March 3, 2020, and informed plaintiff that defendant’s counsel would be 

moving to modify the scheduling order and stay discovery pending a ruling on the dispositive 

motion. (ECF No. 29 at 5.) In response to counsel’s question about plaintiff’s position on the 

matter, defendant’s counsel declares that plaintiff “informed [counsel] that [plaintiff] was alright 

with it and was not opposed to such.” (Id.)

Case 2:19-cv-01586-JAM-KJN Document 32 Filed 03/10/20 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

“The district court is given broad discretion in supervising the pretrial phase of litigation.” 

Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 607 (9th Cir. 1992) (citation and internal 

quotation marks omitted). Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Defendant’s ex parte application (ECF No. 29) is granted;

2. Defendant’s motion for protective order (ECF No. 30) is granted; 

3. Discovery is stayed pending resolution of defendant’s motion for summary judgment;

and

4. The May 22, 2020 discovery and August 7, 2020 pretrial motions deadlines are vacated, 

and will be reset following resolution of defendant’s motion for summary judgment based on 

failure to exhaust administrative remedies.

Dated: March 10, 2020

mcco1586.sty

Case 2:19-cv-01586-JAM-KJN Document 32 Filed 03/10/20 Page 2 of 2