Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-00521/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-00521-4/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

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

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR MODIFICATION OF THE COURT’S PRETRIAL 

SCHEDULING ORDER (DOC. 22) (2:15-cv-0521 CKD PC)

KAMALA D. HARRIS, State Bar No. 146672

Attorney General of California

ALBERTO L. GONZALEZ , State Bar No. 117605

Supervising Deputy Attorney General

JENNIFER MARQUEZ, State Bar No. 232194

Deputy Attorney General

1300 I Street, Suite 125

P.O. Box 944255

Sacramento, CA 94244-2550

Telephone: (916) 324-5569

Fax: (916) 322-8288

E-mail: Jennifer.Marquez@doj.ca.gov

Attorneys for Defendant L. Schmidt

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SACRAMENTO DIVISION

JESSE PEREZ, III,

Plaintiff,

v.

L. SCMIDT,

Defendant,

2:15-cv-0521 CKD PC

STIPULATION AND

ORDER FOR MODIFICATION OF THE 

COURT’S PRETRIAL SCHEDULING 

ORDER (DOC. 22)

COMES NOW Defendant L. Schmidt, through her attorney of record, and Plaintiff Jesse Perez, 

III, in pro per, and subject to the approval of this Court, hereby stipulate and respectfully request 

modification of this Court’s Pretrial Scheduling Order of August 4, 2015 (Doc. No. 22). The parties 

have propounded written discovery and need additional time to complete discovery. 

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

Case 2:15-cv-00521-MCE-CKD Document 29 Filed 11/25/15 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

28

2

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR MODIFICATION OF THE COURT’S PRETRIAL 

SCHEDULING ORDER (DOC. 22) (2:15-cv-0521 CKD PC)

On September 15, 2015, counsel for Defendant Schmidt sent Plaintiff an authorization for 

release of relevant medical records and 602 appeals. On or about September 30, 2015, counsel for 

defendant Schmidt received Plaintiff’s signed authorization. Counsel for defendant has provided 

Plaintiff with a copy of the relevant medical records and 602 appeals received with the authorization 

Plaintiff signed. 

On or about September 28, 2015, Defendant Schmidt propounded one set of special 

interrogatories and one set of request for production of documents to Plaintiff. The Court’s scheduling 

order provides that responses to discovery are due forty-five (45) days after the discovery request is 

served. Plaintiff’s initial due date to respond to Defendant’s written discovery was November 12, 

2015. Plaintiff requested an extension of time to respond because he was expecting a transfer to a 

different facility and all his paperwork and property were packed up, which caused a delay in 

responding. Defendant Schmidt agreed to give Plaintiff until November 30, 2015 to respond to the 

discovery requests.

On or about October 19, 2015, counsel for Defendant Schmidt received Plaintiff’s first set of 

special interrogatories and request for production of documents. Although Plaintiff’s proof of service 

was dated October 1, 2015, counsel for Defendant Schmidt did not receive them until October 19, 

2015. At that time, Defendant Schmidt was on vacation. Defendant Schmidt returned to work on 

November 2, 2015. Counsel for defendant Schmidt sent a letter to Plaintiff requesting a two week 

extension of time or from November 14, 2015, up to and including November 30, 2015. Plaintiff has 

agreed to the extension of time. 

Because the parties have been diligent in conducting discovery and need additional time to 

complete discovery, there is good cause to modify the scheduling order. Therefore, the parties propose 

the following schedule:

The discovery completion deadline of November 30, 2015 be extended ninety (90) days or until 

February 29, 2016. No new discovery requests can be served without leave of court.

The pretrial motions deadline of February 19, 2016 be extended ninety (90) days or until May 

20, 2016.

/ / / 

Case 2:15-cv-00521-MCE-CKD Document 29 Filed 11/25/15 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

28

3

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR MODIFICATION OF THE COURT’S PRETRIAL 

SCHEDULING ORDER (DOC. 22) (2:15-cv-0521 CKD PC)

IT IS SO STIPULATED

Dated: November 20, 2015 Attorney General’s Office of California

By:_/s/ Jennifer Marquez 

_____________________________

JENNIFER MARQUEZ

Deputy Attorney General

Attorneys for Defendant L. Schmidt

Dated: November 10, 2015 IN PRO PER

By:_/s/ Jesse Perez, III

_______________________________

JESSE PEREZ, III

Plaintiff, In Pro Per

IT IS SO ORDERED

Dated: November 25, 2015

_____________________________________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:15-cv-00521-MCE-CKD Document 29 Filed 11/25/15 Page 3 of 3