Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cv-00447/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cv-00447-15/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOHN REYNA,

Plaintiff,

v.

KINGS COUNTY JAIL, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 1:20-cv-00447 KES GSA (PC)

ORDER MODIFYING DISCOVERY AND 

SCHEDULING ORDER

(ECF No. 24)

DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS SHALL BE FILED 

BY SEPTEMBER 12, 2024

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, has filed this civil 

rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States 

Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

Discovery has bene completed and the matter is at the dispositive motion stage of the 

proceedings. For the reasons stated below, the Court will modify the discovery and scheduling 

order (see ECF No. 24) by giving the parties a new date by which to file dispositive motions.

I. RELEVANT PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On September 6, 2022, a discovery and scheduling order was issued in this case. ECF No. 

24. At that time, discovery and dispositive motion deadline dates were set, with discovery to end 

and motions to compel to be filed by March 6, 2023, and dispositive motions to be filed by May 

6, 2023. Id. at 2, 4.

Case 1:20-cv-00447-KES-GSA Document 50 Filed 07/30/24 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

On May 3, 2023, Plaintiff filed a late motion to compel, which was denied. ECF Nos. 28, 

30, respectively. To date, however, no dispositive motions have been filed, and the date to do so 

has passed. See generally ECF No. 31 at 1 (June 7, 2023, order noting same). In addition, the 

Court notes for the record that on more than one occasion the parties have been asked to inform it 

whether they believe holding a settlement conference would be beneficial. ECF Nos. 31, 47. To 

date, however, the parties have not been amenable to holding one.1 See, e.g., ECF Nos. 32-33, 

41, 48-49 (parties’ responses regarding settlement and readiness for trial).

II. DISCUSSION

Given that dispositive motions have yet to be filed in this case, as well as the fact that the 

parties do not believe that a settlement conference would be beneficial at this time, the Court will 

modify the discovery and scheduling order to re-calendar the due date for dispositive motions. 

Because this matter is older than many others on the Court’s docket, in the interests of resolving 

this matter relatively quickly, the due date for the dispositive motions will be forty-five days from 

the date of this order.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Court herein MODIFIES discovery and scheduling order. ECF No. 24.

2. Within forty-five days from the date of this order – by September 12, 2024, – the 

parties permitted to file dispositive motions.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 29, 2024 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1

 In retrospect, inquiries to the parties regarding settlement may have been premature given that 

dispositive motions have yet to be filed.

Case 1:20-cv-00447-KES-GSA Document 50 Filed 07/30/24 Page 2 of 2