Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-04352/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-04352-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights 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

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

HECTOR RIOJAS,

Plaintiff,

v.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, 

et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 15-cv-03592-JST 

SCHEDULING ORDER

The Court hereby sets the following case deadlines pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil 

Procedure 16 and Civil Local Rule 16-10:

Event Deadline

Deadline for Defendants to produce Administrative Records 3/9/2016

Deadline to add parties or amend the pleadings 3/30/2016

Deadline to file cross-motions for summary judgment 4/20/2016

Opposition briefs due 6/1/2016

Reply briefs due 6/15/2016

Hearing on cross-motions for summary judgment 6/30/2016

Counsel may not modify these dates without leave of court. The parties shall comply with 

the Court’s standing orders, which are available at cand.uscourts.gov/jstorders.

The parties must take all necessary steps to conduct discovery, compel discovery, hire 

counsel, retain experts, and manage their calendars so that they can complete discovery in a timely 

Case 3:14-cv-04352-JST Document 79 Filed 02/24/16 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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

manner and appear at trial on the noticed and scheduled dates. All counsel must arrange their 

calendars to accommodate these dates, or arrange to substitute or associate in counsel who can. 

Trial dates set by this Court should be regarded as firm. Requests for continuance are 

disfavored. The Court will not consider any event subsequently scheduled by a party, partycontrolled witness, expert or attorney that conflicts with the above trial date as good cause to grant 

a continuance. The Court will not consider the pendency of settlement discussions as good cause 

to grant a continuance. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 24, 2016

_______________________________________

JON S. TIGAR

United States District Judge

Case 3:14-cv-04352-JST Document 79 Filed 02/24/16 Page 2 of 2