Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00639/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00639-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Bivens 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

McGREGOR W. SCOTT

United States Attorney

BRIAN W. ENOS

Assistant U.S. Attorney

2500 Tulare Street, Suite 4401

Fresno, California 93721

Telephone: (559) 497-4000

Facsimile: (559) 497-4099

Attorneys for Defendant United States of America

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TERRY AUSTIN POOL, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

ROBERT HARO, et al., )

)

)

Defendants. )

 )

1:05-cv-00639 REC WMW P

STIPULATION RE: LITIGATION

SCHEDULE; [PROPOSED] ORDER RE:

SAME

Plaintiff Terry Austin Pool (“Mr. Pool”) and defendants

Robert Haro, Mr. O’Brien, Mr. Shultz, Captain Moorehead, Lt.

Cole, DHO-Officer D. Lorance, Alex Herrera, Lt. Lynn, Federal

Bureau of Prisons and United States of America (“United States”)

stipulate to the following revised case schedule as specified

below and respectfully request that the Court so approve.

This action comprises various constitutional claims alleged

by Mr. Pool. The Court issued a single “Discovery Order,

Scheduling Order” setting forth this case’s litigation schedule

on July 14, 2005. This prior order includes: (1) a March 16,

2006 Discovery Cut-Off Date, (2) an April 17, 2006 Deadline to

Amend Pleadings and (3) a May 17, 2006 Dispositive Motion 

Case 1:05-cv-00639-LJO -WMW Document 19 Filed 02/23/06 Page 1 of 3
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 2

Deadline.

The United States moved to dismiss plaintiffs’ claims in

September 2005. Mr. Pool opposed this motion in October 2005. 

The Court’s ruling on this motion remains pending.

Good cause exists in support of this stipulation. The

parties propounded various sets of discovery on various dates

over the past several weeks. As a result, various responses are

fast becoming due pursuant to the case’s present litigation

schedule. The scope of this action however is uncertain until

the Court rules on the above motion. Accordingly, an extension

of this case’s above-referenced litigation schedule three months

is warranted. An extension of all parties’ discovery response

deadlines from their various present deadlines pursuant to the

July 14, 2005 Order until forty five (45) days after the Court

issues its ruling on the pending motion to dismiss is further

warranted. 

Based on the above, the parties hereby stipulate to the

continuance of this action’s case schedule and discovery response

deadlines as specified below. The parties also request the Court

to endorse this stipulation by way of formal order.

/// 

Old Date New Date

Discovery Responses Due: Various Dates 45 days after 

Issuance of 

Ruling Per 

Pending Motion 

to Dismiss

Discovery Cut-Off Date: March 16, 2006 June 15, 2006

Case 1:05-cv-00639-LJO -WMW Document 19 Filed 02/23/06 Page 2 of 3
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 3

Deadline to Amend April 17, 2006 July 17, 2006

Pleadings 

Dispositive Motion May 17, 2006 August 16, 2006

Deadline 

Dated: February 17, 2006 February 17, 2006

Respectfully submitted,

Terry Austin Pool McGREGOR W. SCOTT

 United States Attorney

(As auth. 2/11/06)

/s/ Terry Austin Pool /s/ Brian W. Enos 

TERRY AUSTIN POOL BRIAN W. ENOS

Plaintiff, Pro Se Attorneys for

United States of America

 IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 23, 2006 /s/ William M. Wunderlich 

j14hj0 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00639-LJO -WMW Document 19 Filed 02/23/06 Page 3 of 3