Hill v. Workday, Inc.

Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 7 8 ANTHONY C. HILL, Case No. 23-cv-06558-PHK 9 Plaintiff,

10 v. GRANTING-IN-PART AND DENYING- IN-PART PLAINTIFF ANTHONY C. 11 WORKDAY, INC., et al., HILL’S EXPEDITED REQUEST TO STAY DISCOVERY DEADLINES 12 Defendants. Re: Dkt. 101 13 14 ORDER 15 Before the Court is Plaintiff Anthony C. Hill’s motion to clarify the procedural status and 16 stay discovery deadlines. [Dkt. 101]. Having carefully reviewed the Parties’ submissions, the Court 17 finds this matter fit for resolution without oral argument. Civil L.R. 7-1(b). Accordingly, the Court 18 GRANTS-IN-PART Plaintiff Hill’s request. 19 District courts are given broad discretion in supervising the pretrial phase of litigation, and 20 control of the docket is a matter left to the discretion of the district court. Bigfoot Ventures Ltd. v. 21 Knighton, 132 F.4th 1138, 1147 (9th Cir. 2025) (quotations omitted). 22 While Plaintiff Hill has recently transitioned to pro se status, he has been on notice of the 23 need to secure substitute counsel. Plaintiff has not demonstrated good cause to extend the stay 24 through August 12, 2025, as requested. Tying the discovery stay to the continued Initial Case 25 Management Conference is not a sufficient justification, particularly where such a delay would 26 require a wholesale revision of the current case schedule. 27 Similarly, while Defendant Workday, Inc., now argues it will be prejudiced by a delay in 1 requests only recently, despite being fully aware of the fact discovery deadline. The Court notes 2 || that the risk of prejudice to Defendant Workday was, at least in part, a consequence of strategic 3 decisions made by both Parties to defer discovery until the pleadings were resolved. The Parties 4 || knowingly made that decision without direction from the Court. 5 Accordingly, the Court stays all discovery deadlines through June 27, 2025. During this 6 || time, Plaintiff Hill is expected to exercise more than minimal diligence in securing new counsel. If 7 no substitute counsel has appeared by that date, Plaintiff Hill must be prepared to proceed pro se, 8 || including participating in discovery and complying with all court orders and deadlines. 9 ADVISEMENT OF PRO SE RESOURCES 10 Plaintiff Hill is ADVISED that there are several resources for pro se litigants. The Court 11 makes available a guide for pro se litigants called Representing Yourself in Federal Court: A g 12 || Handbook for Pro Se Litigants, which provides instructions on how to proceed at every stage of a 13 |) case, including discovery, motions, and trial. This guide is available electronically online at 14 || https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Pro_Se_Handbook_2020ed_links_ 2 15 12-2021 _MBB.pdf or in hard copy free of charge from the Clerk of Court’s Office. The Court 16 additionally has a webpage with resources for pro se litigants: https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/pro- 2 17 || se-litigants/. 18 IT IS SO ORDERED. 19 || Dated: May 29, 2025 20 PETER H. KANG 21 United States Magistrate Judge 22 23 24 25 26 27 28