Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cv-00598/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cv-00598-4/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

MARK A. SCOTT,

 Plaintiff,

 vs.

CASTILLO, et al.,

 Defendants.

1:20-cv-00598-ADA-GSA-PC

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S EXPARTE MOTION TO MODIFY 

SCHEDULING ORDER

(ECF No. 32.)

ORDER EXTENDING DEADLINES FOR 

ALL PARTIES

New Deadline to Complete Discovery: 

March 12, 2023

New Deadline to File Dispositive Motions:

April 12, 2023

I. BACKGROUND

Mark Anthony Scott (“Plaintiff”) is a former prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis with this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This case now proceeds 

against defendant C/O Castillo for use of excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment.1 

On March 1, 2022, the court issued a Discovery and Scheduling Order establishing 

pretrial deadlines for the parties, including a discovery deadline of August 1, 2022 and a 

1 On November 16, 2021, the Court issued an order for this case to proceed only with 

Plaintiff’s excessive force claims against defendant C/O Castillo, and dismissing all other claims and 

defendants. (ECF No. 19.)

Case 1:20-cv-00598-KES-GSA Document 33 Filed 12/09/22 Page 1 of 3
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

dispositive motion filing deadline of October 1, 2022. (ECF No. 26.) These deadlines have 

expired.

On December 7, 2022, Defendant filed an ex-parte motion to modify the Scheduling 

Order. (ECF No. 32.) 

II. MOTION TO MODIFY SCHEDULING ORDER

Modification of a scheduling order requires a showing of good cause, Fed. R. Civ. P. 

16(b), and good cause requires a showing of due diligence, Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, 

Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992). To establish good cause, the party seeking the 

modification of a scheduling order must generally show that even with the exercise of due 

diligence, they cannot meet the requirement of the order. Id. The court may also consider the 

prejudice to the party opposing the modification. Id. If the party seeking to amend the scheduling 

order fails to show due diligence the inquiry should end and the court should not grant the motion 

to modify. Zivkovic v. Southern California Edison, Co., 302 F.3d 1080, 1087 (9th Cir. 2002). 

Defendant requests that discovery be reopened for 90 days, with dispositive motions due 

within 120 days. Defense counsel informs the Court that due to an unexpected family emergency

he was off work and out of state for many days and did not return until the discovery deadline 

had expired. (Declaration of Matthew Stohl, ECF No. 32-2 ¶¶ 1, 5, 6.) Plaintiff agreed to file a 

joint request for a continuance but failed to sign and return the agreed-upon stipulation and has 

not responded to communication attempts. (Id. ¶¶ 8-12.) 

The Court finds good cause to grant Defendant’s motion to modify the deadlines in the 

Court’s Discovery and Scheduling Order. Therefore, Defendant’s motion to modify the 

Scheduling Order, filed on December 7, 2022, shall be granted.

III. CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Defendant’s ex-parte motion to modify the Court’s Scheduling Order, filed on 

December 7, 2022, is GRANTED;

///

2. Discovery is now reopened, with a deadline of March 12, 2023 to complete 

Case 1:20-cv-00598-KES-GSA Document 33 Filed 12/09/22 Page 2 of 3
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

28

discovery, including the filing of motions to compel; 

3. The new deadline for filing dispositive motions is April 12, 2023; and

4. All other provisions of the court’s March 1, 2022 Discovery and Scheduling Order 

remain the same.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 8, 2022 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:20-cv-00598-KES-GSA Document 33 Filed 12/09/22 Page 3 of 3