(PC) Parker v. N. West

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MELVIN PARKER, Case No. 2:22-cv-2015 CSK P 12 Plaintiff, [PROPOSED] ORDER 13 v. 14 N. WEST, Defendant. 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se. On June 14, 2024, defendant filed a motion to modify the discovery and scheduling order (ECF No. 55). This is defendant’s first request to modify the discovery and scheduling order. Governing Standards “The district court is given broad discretion in supervising the pretrial phase of litigation.” Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 607 (9th Cir. 1992) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). Rule 16(b) provides that “[a] schedule may be modified only for good cause and with the judge’s consent.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). “The schedule may be modified ‘if it cannot reasonably be met despite the diligence of the party seeking the extension.’” Zivkovic v. Southern California Edison Co., 302 F.3d 1080, 1087 (9th Cir. 2002) (quoting Johnson, 975 F.2d at 607). ] …