Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

More v. Ryan

United States District Court, D. Arizona

October 24, 2018

Michael More, Plaintiff,
v.
Charles L. Ryan, et al., Defendants.

          ORDER

          Honorable Deborah M. Fine United States Magistrate Judge.

         Before the Court are Plaintiff's Motions to Compel. (Docs. 60, 63, 64) Defendants acknowledge that the system for providing prisoners with electronically filed documents suffered from some interruptions. (Doc. 62) Plaintiff claims that this interruption meant that he did not receive copies of certain documents in this matter, and specifically references the Court's August 13, 2018 order issuing him one blank subpoena duces tecum. (Doc. 60 referencing Doc. 55) The Court notes that the Clerk's Office received the completed subpoena from Plaintiff and the U.S. Marshals Service has filed its Notice of Service. (Doc. 69) Moreover, Defendant filed a Notice of Service for the documents that Plaintiff had alleged were not received. (Doc. 66) Accordingly, the Court concludes that Plaintiff's motions to compel are moot. (Docs. 60, 63, 64).

         Plaintiff also requested extensions because of delay in receiving documents. (Docs. 61, 65, 67) Defendants did not respond. Good cause appearing, the Court will extend pertinent deadlines.

         IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED denying as moot Plaintiff's Motion to Compel A.D.C. to Comply (Doc. 60), Expedited Motion to Compel (Doc. 63), and Expedited Motion to Compel (Doc. 64).

         IT IS FURTHER ORDERED granting Plaintiff's Motions to Extend Time (Docs. 61, 65, 67) as set forth herein. The new deadlines are as follows:

         1. Any motion seeking dismissal of Plaintiff's claims or judgment as a matter of law on Plaintiff's claims based on an assertion that Plaintiff failed to administratively exhaust his claims shall be brought no later than December 30, 2018.

         2. Last day by which discovery requests may be submitted (discovery request cutoff date) is February 28, 2019.

         2.1. No discovery requests may be submitted after this date except by stipulation of the parties or by Court order for good cause shown.

         2.2. Responses to discovery must be filed within the time provided by the rules unless the parties stipulate otherwise.

         3. If Defendants desire to take Plaintiff's deposition they may do so by no later than January 29, 2019.

         3.1. Leave of Court for the taking of such deposition is granted pursuant to Rule 30(a)(2), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The deposition may be taken by telephone at the option of Defendants.

         4. Dispositive motion deadline is April 29, 2019. If Defendants file a motion for summary judgment under Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure based on Plaintiff's failure to exhaust prison administrative remedies as required by 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a) and the Court denies that motion, Defendants may file a second motion for summary judgment without requesting permission from the Court. Otherwise, no party may file more than one motion for summary judgment under Rule 56 unless permission is first obtained from the Court.

         5. Proposed joint pretrial order lodged with the Court by May 9, 2019, or 30 days after the Court's ruling on the last dispositive motion, if any, that does not dispose of the case, whichever is later.

         5.1. Defendants are responsible for initiating the drafting and submission of the proposed pretrial order in the form ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.