(PC) Witkin v. Lotersztain

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA MICHAEL WITKIN, No. 2:19-cv-0406 TLN KJN P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND REVISED SCHEDULING ORDER M LOTERSZTAIN,, et al., 15 Defendants.

17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding pro se. On May 17, 2021, plaintiff filed a motion to modify the scheduling order. Plaintiff seeks a one-week extension of the discovery deadline to allow his final set of discovery requests to be timely under the scheduling order.

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

21 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.’”

25 Zivkovic v. Southern California Edison Co., 302 F.3d 1080, 1087 (9th Cir. 2002) (quoting 26 Johnson, 975 F.2d at 607).

27 The undersigned has read and considered plaintiff’s motion to modify the scheduling order. Good cause appearing, the undersigned grants the motion. In light of mailing delays, the || discovery deadline is extended to July 30, 2021. The pretrial motions deadline is extended to || October 22, 2021.

3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 4 1. Plaintiff's motion (ECF No. 31) is granted; 5 2. The July 16, 2021 discovery deadline is extended until July 30, 2021; and 6 3. The dispositive motions deadline, October 8, 2021, is extended to October 22, 2021.

7 || All other provisions of the prior scheduling order (ECF No. 30) remain in full force and effect.

8 | Dated: May 25, 2021 Foci) Aharon 10 KENDALL J. NE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE || /cwiwitk0406.16b