Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-01473/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-01473-32/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

DANA GRAY, 

 Plaintiff,

 vs.

ROMERO, et al.,

 Defendants.

1:13-cv-01473-DAD-GSA-PC

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S 

MOTIONS TO EXTEND DISCOVERY 

AND SUPPLEMENT COMPLAINT AS 

PREMATURE, WITHOUT PREJUDICE

(ECF Nos. 159, 162, 163.)

Dana Gray (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action 

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ' 1983. This case now proceeds on Plaintiff’s Fourth Amended 

Complaint filed on September 21, 2015, against defendants Dr. V. Romero, Dr. A. Comelli, 

FNP N. Loadholt, Dr. C. Rebel, John Ziomek, DPM, and Dr. V. Mundunuri, on Plaintiff’s 

medical claim under the Eighth Amendment. (ECF No. 45.) This case is now in the discovery 

phase.

On April 29, 2016, defendant Rebel filed a motion to dismiss the claims against him as 

barred by the statute of limitations. (ECF No. 57.) On August 31, 2016, defendants 

Mundunuri and Ziomek filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings based on Plaintiff’s 

failure to exhaust administrative remedies. (ECF No. 122.) These two motions are pending.

On January 26, 2017, and February 1, 2017, Plaintiff filed two motions for a ninety-day 

extension of the discovery deadline, and a motion for leave to supplement the complaint. (ECF 

Case 1:13-cv-01473-DAD-GSA Document 165 Filed 02/03/17 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

Nos. 159, 162, 163.) These motions are premature and shall be denied without prejudice to 

renewing them at a later stage of the proceedings. Until a final ruling is made on defendant 

Rebel’s motion to dismiss and defendants Mundunuri and Ziomek’s motion for judgment on 

the pleadings, Plaintiff may not amend or supplement the complaint, and Plaintiff’s motion to 

extend discovery shall not be considered at this time. 

Therefore, based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motions 

to extend the discovery deadline and supplement the complaint, filed on January 26, 2017, and 

February 1, 2017, are DENIED as premature, without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 3, 2017 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:13-cv-01473-DAD-GSA Document 165 Filed 02/03/17 Page 2 of 2