Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-01888/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-01888-6/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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CARLOS J. GARCIA,

Plaintiff,

v.

BONNIE LEE, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:15-cv-1888 MCE CKD P

ORDER

This action proceeds on plaintiff’s medical indifference claim against defendant Hogue, 

who has answered the complaint. (ECF Nos. 13, 15 & 29.) The discovery deadline is November 

18, 2016. (ECF No. 31.) On August 5, 2016, defendant filed a motion for summary judgment on 

the ground that plaintiff has not exhausted administrative remedies as to his claim under 42 

U.S.C. § 1997e(a). (ECF No. 32.) 

Courts may issue a protective order staying discovery pending the resolution of potentially 

dispositive motions. See e.g., Little v. City of Seattle, 863 F.2d 681, 685 (9th Cir. 1988) (no 

abuse of discretion where district court stayed discovery until issue of immunity was decided on 

summary judgment). In appropriate circumstances, a discovery stay “furthers the goal of 

efficiency for the court and litigants.” Id. at 685.

Here, as defendant’s motion for summary judgment is potentially dispositive, it is 

appropriate to stay discovery on the merits of plaintiff’s claim and vacate the pretrial motion 

Case 2:15-cv-01888-MCE-CKD Document 33 Filed 08/10/16 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

2

deadline pending resolution of the motion. See Albino v. Baca, 747 F.3d 1162, 1170 (9th Cir. 

2014) (en banc) (“Exhaustion should be decided, if feasible, before reaching the merits of a 

prisoner’s claim”; thus district court may “leav[e] until later . . . discovery directed to the merits 

of the suit.”), citing Pavey v. Conley, 544 F.3d 739, 742 (7th Cir. 2008)

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Discovery in this matter is stayed until the district court issues a final ruling on the 

defendant’s August 5, 2016 motion for summary judgment; and 

2. The discovery and pretrial motion cut off dates set forth in the Discovery and 

Scheduling Order issued on June 28, 2016 are hereby vacated. The court will reset those dates if 

defendant’s motion for summary judgment is denied.

Dated: August 10, 2016

2 /garc1888.stay

_____________________________________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:15-cv-01888-MCE-CKD Document 33 Filed 08/10/16 Page 2 of 2