Barber

(PC) Wilkins v. Barber

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJanuary 14, 20212:19-cv-01338California1,893 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 KEENAN WILKINS, aka NERRAH No. 2:19-cv-1338 WBS KJN P

BROWN,

12 Plaintiff, ORDER AND REVISED SCHEDULING v. ORDER 14 DR. CHRISTINE S. BARBER, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding pro se, in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff’s motion for extension of time to complete discovery and for appointment of counsel are before the court. As discussed below, plaintiff’s motion to modify the scheduling order is granted, and his motion for appointment of counsel is denied. Operative Scheduling Order On September 29, 2020, the undersigned issued a discovery and scheduling order; the deadline for discovery was set for January 22, 2021, and all requests for discovery pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil procedure 31, 33, 34 or 36 must be served not later than sixty days prior to such date. (ECF No. 124 at 6.) In other words, discovery requests must be served on or before November 23, 2020. //// 28 …

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.