Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_18-cv-00579/USCOURTS-caed-1_18-cv-00579-22/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

JERRY DILLINGHAM,

 Plaintiff,

 v.

F. GARCIA,

 Defendant.

Case No. 1:18-cv-00579-NONE-EPG (PC)

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S 

RENEWED MOTION TO MODIFY 

SCHEDULING ORDER

(ECF NO. 106)

Jerry Dillingham (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

On March 13, 2020, Defendant filed a renewed motion to modify the scheduling order. 

(ECF No. 106). Defendant points out that “[i]t is now within twenty-one days of the 

dispositive motion deadline (ECF No. 75), and the District Court has not yet ruled on the 

findings and recommendations dated December 4, 2019.” (ECF No. 106, p. 2). Defendant 

argues that “[g]ood cause exists to grant Defendant’s renewed motion to modify the scheduling 

order, because the pleadings are still unresolved. Preparing and filing a dispositive motion by 

the current deadline is premature. It serves judicial economy to modify the scheduling order at 

this juncture, because, otherwise, proceeding with the current schedule would unnecessarily 

complicate the procedural posture and prejudice Defendant.” (Id.). Defendant asks the Court 

Case 1:18-cv-00579-DAD-EPG Document 107 Filed 03/16/20 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

“to modify the scheduling order and requests that the Court modify the dispositive motion 

deadline to a date after the District Court issues a ruling on the findings and recommendations.” 

(Id.).

The Court finds good cause to grant Defendant’s motion. Accordingly, IT IS 

ORDERED that the parties have thirty days from the date of the assigned district judge’s order 

on the findings and recommendations dated December 4, 2019, to file dispositive motions.

The Court notes that it is not modifying any other deadlines at this time. Either party 

may move for modification of the remaining deadlines if it becomes necessary.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 16, 2020 /s/

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:18-cv-00579-DAD-EPG Document 107 Filed 03/16/20 Page 2 of 2