J.A.J. v. Jimenez

Opinion

ROB BONTA, State Bar No. 202668 Panos Lagos, Esq. (SBN 61821) Attorney General of California LAW OFFICES OF PANOS LAGOS PETER A. MESHOT, State Bar No. 117061 5032 Woodminster Lane Supervising Deputy Attorney General Oakland, CA 94602-2614 DIANA ESQUIVEL, State Bar No. 202954 Tel: 510.530.4078 Deputy Attorney General Fax: 510.530.4725 1300 I Street, Suite 125 E-mail: panos@panoslagoslaw.com P.O. Box 944255 Sacramento, CA 94244-2550 Sanjay S. Schmidt (SBN 247475) Telephone: (916) 210-7320 LAW OFFICE OF SANJAY S. SCHMIDT Facsimile: (916) 322-8288 1388 Sutter Street, Suite 810 E-mail: Diana.Esquivel@doj.ca.gov San Francisco, CA 94109 Tel: (415) 563-8583 Attorneys for Defendant Jimenez Fax: (415) 223-9717 E-mail: ss@sanjayschmidtlaw.com

Attorneys for Plaintiffs J. A. J. and Teresa Gonzalez-Velazquez J.A.J., et al. No. 1:18-cv-01138-DAD-SKO Plaintiffs, STIPULATION AND ORDER TO MODIFY SCHEDULING ORDER TO v. EXTEND THE DISPOSITIVE-MOTION

EFRAIN JIMENEZ, et al., (Doc. 56)

Defendants. Action Filed: August 22, 2018 Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b)(4) and Local Rule 143, the parties, through their respective counsel of record, stipulate and request to modify the April 15, 2020 Amended Scheduling Order (ECF No. 46) to extend the deadline by when dispositive motions must be filed. The current deadline to file dispositive motions is July 2, 2021. (Id.) The parties seek to continue the deadline by seven days to July 9, 2021. Good cause exists to grant this stipulated request because, despite the parties’ diligence, the deposition transcript of a pertinent witness is not yet available. This requested modification will not affect any other scheduling deadline. When an act must be done within a specified time, the court may, for good cause, extend the time with or without motion or notice if the court acts, or if a request is made, before the original time expires. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(A). A scheduling order may be modified only upon a showing of good cause and by leave of Court. Id. 16(b)(4); see, e.g., Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (describing the factors a court should consider in ruling on such a motion). In considering whether a party moving for a schedule modification has good cause, the Court primarily focuses on the diligence of the party seeking the modification. Johnson, 975 F.2d at 609 (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 16 advisory committee’s notes of 1983 amendment). “The district court may modify the pretrial schedule ‘if it cannot reasonably be met despite the diligence of the party seeking the amendment.’” Id. (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 16 advisory committee notes of 1983 amendment). On April 5, 2019, the Court entered its initial Scheduling Order. (ECF No. 23.) Due to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the parties requested, and the Court granted, an extension of all the scheduling deadlines and trial on April 20, 2020. (ECF No. 46.) It should be noted that, at that time, the full scope and expected duration of the pandemic and concomitant public health measures and restrictions were unknown by public health and government officials, let alone the parties and their respective counsel. Despite the challenges posed by the pandemic, the parties have completed fact and expert discovery. On June 10, 2021, the last witness, Sergeant Kerber of the Madera County Sheriff’s Department, was deposed. However, the transcript of his deposition is not yet available. The testimony of Sergeant Kerber is needed to support Defendant’s motion for summary judgment that he intends to file. Without it, Defendant is not likely to meet his burden. For this reason, Defendant requests, and Plaintiffs have no objection, to a seven-day extension of the July 2 deadline to file dispositive motions. This extension will allow time for the deposition transcript to be prepared or, if necessary, allow Defendant to request an expedited copy. / / / / / / / / / The parties respectfully submit that good cause exists to continue the dispositive-motion deadline. The parties do not anticipate that this request will affect any other scheduling deadline. Dated: June 29, 2021 Respectfully submitted,

Attorney General of California Supervising Deputy Attorney General /s/ Diana Esquivel Deputy Attorney General Attorneys for Defendant Jimenez

Dated: June 29, 2021 LAW OFFICES OF PANOS LAGOS

/s/ Panos Lagos (as authorized 6/29/21) PANOS LAGOS Attorneys for Plaintiffs J. A. J. and Teresa Gonzalez-Velazquez

SA2018302522 35241101.docx Pursuant to the parties’ above stipulation (Doc. 56), and for good cause shown, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the deadline to file dispositive motions is continued from July 2, 2021, to July 9, 2021. In all other respects, the April 15, 2020 Amended Scheduling Order (Doc. 46) remains in effect.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 30, 2021 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto . UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE