(PC) Harris v. Kernan

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WAYDE HOLLIS HARRIS, No. 2:17-cv-0680 TLN KJN P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND REVISED SCHEDULING ORDER S. KERNAN, et al., 15 Defendants.

17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding pro se. On March 24, 2021, plaintiff filed a motion for extension of time to file a pretrial motion due to COVID-19 restrictions and limited law library access. On March 26, 2021, defendant Kuersten filed a motion to modify the scheduling order to request additional medical records needed to complete his motion for summary judgment.

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

23 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).

26 Good cause appearing, the parties’ motions are granted. The parties shall have until April 30, 2021, to file pretrial motions.

28 //// 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. Plaintiff's motion for an extension of time (ECF No. 106) is granted.

3 2. Defendant’s motion to modify the scheduling order (ECF No. 107) is granted.

4 3. The pretrial motions deadline is extended to April 30, 2021.

5 Dated: March 30, 2021 Fesll Arn 7 KENDALL J. NE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE harr0680.36