Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_23-cv-00986/USCOURTS-caed-2_23-cv-00986-5/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Anise Adams
Defendant
Surinder Bains
Plaintiff
Bertolino
Defendant
F. Cassillas
Defendant
Fears
Defendant

Document Text:

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

SURINDER BAINS,

Plaintiff,

v.

ADAMS, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:23-0986 CSK P

ORDER

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se. Defendants’ second motion to modify the 

Discovery and Scheduling Order based on plaintiff’s alleged failure to properly respond to 

interrogatories and requests for production of documents is before the Court. (ECF No. 21.) As 

discussed below, defendants’ second motion to modify is granted, and plaintiff is ordered to file 

an opposition or statement of non-opposition to defendants’ motion to compel discovery.

I. BACKGROUND 

This action proceeds on plaintiff’s complaint against defendants Anise Adams, Sgt. 

Bertolino, Sgt. F. Cassillas, and Sgt. Fears for their alleged deliberate indifference to the 

substantial risk of harm from COVID in violation of the Eighth Amendment. (ECF No. 1.) 

Plaintiff alleges defendants’ intentional acts or omissions caused plaintiff to become infected with 

COVID on two separate occasions. (Id.)

///

Case 2:23-cv-00986-CSK Document 22 Filed 11/12/24 Page 1 of 4
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 April 29, 2024, the Court issued the Discovery and Scheduling Order, setting the 

discovery deadline for August 16, 2024, and the pretrial motions deadline for November 8, 2024. 

(ECF No. 15.) 

On August 1, 2024, plaintiff was granted thirty days to respond to defendant Adams’ first 

set of interrogatories and first request for production of documents. (ECF No. 17.) On August 2, 

2024, defendants filed a motion to extend the discovery and pretrial motions deadlines based on 

the extension of time. (ECF No. 18.) On August 7, 2024, defendants’ motion was granted, and 

the discovery deadline was extended to October 15, 2024, and the pretrial motions deadline was 

extended to January 7, 2025. (ECF No. 19.)

On October 7, 2024, defendants filed their second motion to modify the Court’s 

scheduling order. (ECF No. 21.) Defendants ask the Court to vacate the discovery and pretrial 

motions deadlines until after the Court addresses defendants’ concurrently filed motion to compel 

discovery responses. (ECF No. 20.) 

Plaintiff has not filed a response to the second motion to modify the Court’s scheduling 

order, or an opposition or statement of no opposition to defendants’ motion to compel discovery 

responses. See Local Rule 230(l).

II. GOVERNING STANDARDS

“The district court is given broad discretion in supervising the pretrial phase of litigation.” 

Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 607 (9th Cir. 1992) (citation and internal 

quotation marks omitted). Rule 16(b) provides that “[a] schedule may be modified only for good 

cause and with the judge’s consent.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). “The schedule may be modified 

‘if it cannot reasonably be met despite the diligence of the party seeking the extension.’” 

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

Johnson, 975 F.2d at 607).

III. DISCUSSION

Defendants have shown good cause to vacate this Court’s deadlines. Defendants aver that 

plaintiff’s failure to provide discovery responses forced them to postpone plaintiff’s deposition 

and file their motion to compel discovery. (ECF No. 21 at 3.) Defendants state they are unable to 

Case 2:23-cv-00986-CSK Document 22 Filed 11/12/24 Page 2 of 4
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

properly evaluate plaintiff’s claims and putative defenses until plaintiff provides complete 

discovery responses. (Id.) Plaintiff filed nothing in response to defendants’ second motion to 

modify the scheduling order. In light of the pendency of the motion to compel, and the 

postponement of plaintiff’s deposition, the discovery and pretrial motions deadlines are vacated 

and will be reset, if appropriate, following resolution of defendants’ motion to compel discovery 

responses.

In addition, plaintiff has not filed an opposition or statement of no opposition to 

defendants’ motion to compel discovery responses. Local Rule 230(l) provides in part: “Failure 

of the responding party to file written opposition or to file a statement of no opposition may be 

deemed a waiver of any opposition to the granting of the motion . . . .” Local Rule 230(l). 

Plaintiff is granted an additional twenty-one days to file an opposition or statement of no 

opposition to defendants’ motion to compel discovery responses (ECF No. 20). 

Plaintiff is cautioned that he is required to cooperate in discovery. Failure to cooperate in 

discovery may result in the imposition of sanctions, including, but not limited to, a 

recommendation that this action be dismissed. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(b)(2)(A) (sanctions may be 

imposed for failure to comply with a discovery order); Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(d)(3) (sanctions may be 

imposed for failure to serve answers to interrogatories or to respond to request for production of 

documents). 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Defendants’ second motion to modify the Discovery and Scheduling Order (ECF No. 

21) is granted. 

2. The discovery and pretrial motions deadlines set in the April 19, 2024 order (ECF No. 

15) are vacated pending further order of the Court.

3. Within fourteen days from the date of this order, plaintiff shall file an opposition or 

statement of no opposition to defendants’ motion to compel further discovery 

responses. Plaintiff is cautioned that failure to file an opposition or statement of nonopposition may result in an order imposing sanctions, as set forth above. 

////

Case 2:23-cv-00986-CSK Document 22 Filed 11/12/24 Page 3 of 4
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

4

Dated: November 12, 2024

/1/bain0986.16b2

Case 2:23-cv-00986-CSK Document 22 Filed 11/12/24 Page 4 of 4