Filed: Mar. 03, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2016
Summary: ORDER (Mot. Prior Discovery — Dkt. #86) (Mot. Ext. Discovery — Dkt. #87) PEGGY A. LEEN , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the Court on Defendant Nye County's Motion/Request for Prior Pleadings and All Discovery (Dkt. #86) and Motion to Extend Discovery (Dkt. #87). This proceeding was referred to the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(A) and LR IB 1-3 and 1-9. I. MOTION/REQUEST FOR PRIOR PLEADINGS AND ALL DISCOVERY (DKT. #86) Defendant Nye County submitted its request
Summary: ORDER (Mot. Prior Discovery — Dkt. #86) (Mot. Ext. Discovery — Dkt. #87) PEGGY A. LEEN , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the Court on Defendant Nye County's Motion/Request for Prior Pleadings and All Discovery (Dkt. #86) and Motion to Extend Discovery (Dkt. #87). This proceeding was referred to the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(A) and LR IB 1-3 and 1-9. I. MOTION/REQUEST FOR PRIOR PLEADINGS AND ALL DISCOVERY (DKT. #86) Defendant Nye County submitted its request f..
More
ORDER
(Mot. Prior Discovery — Dkt. #86)
(Mot. Ext. Discovery — Dkt. #87)
PEGGY A. LEEN, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the Court on Defendant Nye County's Motion/Request for Prior Pleadings and All Discovery (Dkt. #86) and Motion to Extend Discovery (Dkt. #87). This proceeding was referred to the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) and LR IB 1-3 and 1-9.
I. MOTION/REQUEST FOR PRIOR PLEADINGS AND ALL DISCOVERY (DKT. #86)
Defendant Nye County submitted its request for "copies of any and all prior pleadings and discovery requests and responses" from both Defendant Health Care Partners and Plaintiff. Defendant Health Care Partners filed a Response (Dkt. #89) with the Court.
LR 26-6 of the Local Rules of Practice states:
A party who enters a case after discovery has begun is entitled, on written request, to inspect and copy, at the requesting party's expense, all discovery provided or taken by every other party in the case. The request shall be directed to the party who provided the discovery or, if the discovery was obtained from a person not a party to the case, to the party who took such discovery.
Id. (emphasis added). This request should have been served on the parties from whom discovery was requested was improperly filed on the Court's docket. See LR 26-8 (providing that written discovery "shall not be filed with the Court"). Accordingly, the Court will direct the Clerk's Office to strike the improper filing from the docket.
II. MOTION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY (DKT. #87)
In this Motion, filed November 30, 2015, Defendant Nye County requests a 60-day extension of the discovery deadlines based on its recent involvement in the case. The Court granted Plaintiff leave to amend his Complaint on August 21, 2015, and instructed the Clerk's Office to issue summons for Nye County and two officers at the Nye County Detention Center. See Order (Dkt. #68);1 Am. Compl. (Dkt. #69). On October 22, 2015, a summons was returned executed for Nye County. See USM Return Executed (Dkt. #80).
When a request is made to modify a discovery plan and scheduling order before the expiration of the deadlines therein and before the final pretrial order is entered, a district court may extend the discovery deadlines upon a showing of "good cause." Coleman v. Quaker Oats Co., 232 F.3d 1271, 1294 (9th Cir. 2000). The good cause standard "primarily considers the diligence of the party seeking the amendment." Id. Discovery extensions may be allowed if the deadlines "cannot reasonably be met despite the diligence of the party seeking the extension." Id. Additionally, any motion or stipulation to extend a deadline or to reopen discovery must comply with Local Rules 26-4 and 6-1, and include the following:
(a) A statement specifying the discovery completed;
(b) A specific description of the discovery that remains to be completed;
(c) The reasons why the deadline was not satisfied or the remaining discovery was not completed within the time limits set by the discovery plan; and,
(d) A proposed schedule for completing all remaining discovery.
See LR 26-4.
Nye County in this matter has not had the same opportunity to conduct discovery. An extension will allow Nye County an opportunity to review the pleadings, draft written discovery, and notice and conduct depositions. Neither Plaintiff nor Defendant Health Care Partners filed an opposition to this Motion and the time for filing a response has now passed. In a separate order, the Court has ordered summons re-issued to Defendant Deputy Gregory Arms and given Mr. Willing 45 days (or until April 18, 2016) to effectuate service. As such, the Court finds good cause to extend the deadlines stated in Order (Dkt. #68) by 90 days from the date of entry of this Order.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED:
1. The Clerk of the Court shall STRIKE Defendant Nye County's Motion/Request for Prior Pleadings and All Discovery (Dkt. #86) and Defendant Health Care Partners' Response (Dkt. #89) from the docket.
2. Defendant Nye County's Motion to Extend Discovery (Dkt. #87) is GRANTED. The following deadlines stated in Order (Dkt. #68) are extended by 90 days:
a. Discovery in this action shall be completed on or before June 2, 2016;
b. Motions for summary judgment shall be filed and served no later than July 1, 2016; and
c. The Parties shall file a Joint Pretrial Order on or before August 1, 2016.
