Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_04-cv-01185/USCOURTS-azd-2_04-cv-01185-2/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

 Also included in the list of defendants in the motion is Corrections Corporation of

America ("CCA"). However, CCA was dismissed by the district court in the screening order

(Doc. #6) back on September 9, 2004.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Yingzhi C. Zhang, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Corrections Corporation of America, et al.,

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 04-1185-PHX-ROS (ECV)

ORDER

Defendants Stolc, Matlock and Battaglia1

 have filed a Motion to Extend Deadlines

(Doc. #54) in which they seek a 90-day extension of the discovery deadline, the dispositive

motion deadline and the joint proposed pretrial order deadline. Defendants contend that they

have had difficulty obtaining Plaintiff's immigration documents and thus have had to delay

scheduling Plaintiff's deposition. Plaintiff filed a Response (Doc. #55) in which he argues

that Defendants have waited until the last minute to conduct discovery and should not be able

to delay the proceedings because of their own tardiness. Plaintiff further contends that his

immigration file is not relevant to the civil rigths violations alleged in the complaint. In their

Reply (Doc. #56), Defendants explain that they submitted numerous FOIA requests to obtain

Plaintiff's immigration records and that Plaintiff has refused to produce such records.

Case 2:04-cv-01185-ROS Document 58 Filed 12/09/05 Page 1 of 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

- 2 -

Defendants further explain how the records are relevant to this case. Additionally,

Defendants indicate that they intend to take Plaintiff's deposition at the end of December

2005 and that they anticipate all the requested documents will be received by that time. 

The court finds that Defendants have established good cause for an extension. This

is their first request and they have shown a genuine, good faith effort to obtain discovery

relevant to their defense in this action. Accordingly, the court will extend the specified

deadlines by 90 days. Given the length of the extension, the court will not consider any

additional extensions absent extraordinary circumstances. 

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED:

That Defendants' Motion to Extend Deadlines (Doc. #54) is granted;

That the deadline for completion of discovery is extended to February 28, 2006;

That the dispositive motion deadline is extended to April 28, 2006; and

That the deadline for filing the joint proposed pretrial order is extended to June 30,

2006. 

DATED this 8th day of December, 2005.

Case 2:04-cv-01185-ROS Document 58 Filed 12/09/05 Page 2 of 2