Eslick

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 GUILLERMO NUNO, No. 1:21-cv-00769-NODJ-SAB (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING, IN PART,

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO MODIFY THE

v. SCHEDULING ORDER D. ESLICK, et al. (ECF No. 75) Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion to modify the scheduling order, filed December 4, 2023. (ECF No. 75.) Defendants filed a response on December 11, 2023. (ECF No. 76.) Although the time to file a reply has not expired, the Court deems a reply unnecessary. Local Rule 230(l). I. DISCUSSION Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b)(4), a scheduling order “may be modified only for good cause and with the judge's consent.” Good cause requires a showing of due diligence, which is the primary factor considered. Johnson v.…