Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-00932/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-00932-3/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

GEORGE MCCLURE,

Plaintiff,

vs.

C.K. CHEN, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:14-cv-00932 DAD DLB PC

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’

REQUEST TO MODIFY SCHEDULING 

ORDER

[ECF No. 25]

Plaintiff George McClure is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in 

this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

On March 14, 2016, Defendants filed a request to modify the discovery and scheduling 

order. 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. 

Case 1:14-cv-00932-DAD-GSA Document 27 Filed 03/21/16 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

Defendants state that good cause exists to vacate the current deadline for initial 

disclosures, because Defendants will be filing a dispositive motion on or about March 25, 2016, 

that could potentially dispose of the entire case. Defendants state the motion for summary 

judgment will be based on failure to state a claim, failure to exhaust administrative remedies, and 

qualified immunity. Given that the motion may dispose of some claims or the entire case, it will 

be unclear to the parties what, if any, issues will remain for the purposes of proceeding with 

initial disclosures. In light of the above, the Court finds good cause to modify the scheduling 

order. 

Accordingly, Defendants’ request to modify the Discovery and Scheduling Order is 

GRANTED. The existing initial disclosure deadline is VACATED pending a ruling on 

Defendants’ anticipated motion for summary judgment.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 19, 2016 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-00932-DAD-GSA Document 27 Filed 03/21/16 Page 2 of 2