ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' EX PARTE MOTION TO MODIFY THE SCHEDULING ORDER (ECF No.65)

Dispositive Motion Deadline: March 22, 2018

BARBARA A. McAULIFFE, Magistrate Judge.

Plaintiff Rashad King ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action proceeds on Plaintiff's complaint, filed on December 18, 2015, for violations of the Eighth Amendment against Defendants Holland and Duncan for excessive force during the first escort; Defendants Holland, Duncan, and Solis for excessive force in the second cell; against Defendant Tingley for failing to intervene in the attack by Defendants Holland, Solis, and Duncan in the second cell; and an Eighth Amendment sexual assault against Defendant Holland.

On March 28, 2017, the Court issued a Discovery and Scheduling Order, setting the deadline for dispositive motions for February 5, 2018. (ECF No. 30.) On November 14, 2017, Defendants filed an ex parte application to modify the scheduling order to extend the discovery deadline to take Plaintiff's deposition. (ECF No. 63.) The Court granted the motion and extended the discovery deadline to December 19, 2017. (ECF No. 64.)

Currently before the Court is Defendants' ex parte application to modify the scheduling order to extend the deadline to file dispositive motions. (ECF No. 65.) Plaintiff has not responded to the motion, but the Court finds a response unnecessary, and that Plaintiff will not be prejudiced by the consideration of this motion. Local Rule 230(l).

Defendants seek an extension of the dispositive motion deadline for forty-five days, from February 5, 2018 up to and including March 22, 2018. (ECF No. 65.) Defendants argue that Plaintiff's deposition was taken on December 14, 2017 at High Desert State Prison, but due to the press of other business and defense counsel's workload, additional time is required to complete the summary judgment motion. In addition, defense counsel has been in contact with the Central District's mediation program, and is scheduled to speak with Plaintiff on February 5, 2018, to evaluation settlement before filing the motion. Defendants anticipate filing the motion after completing the tasks necessary to file the motion, including obtaining Defendants' and ancillary witnesses' declarations. (Id.)

Defendants have shown good cause for modifying the scheduling order in this matter. Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). In addition, the Court finds that Plaintiff will not be prejudiced by the brief extension of time granted here.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

IT IS SO ORDERED.