Just

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 Lance Williams, No. 2:18-cv-00740-KJM-DMC 12 Plaintiff, ORDER 13 v. D. Just, 1S Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff Lance Williams moves to attend the final pretrial conference for this case 18 | remotely via Zoom, for the court to appoint him counsel and to reopen discovery. Mot. at 1, ECF 19 | No. 128. Defendant D. Just opposes. Opp’n, ECF No. 129. The court denies the motion. 20 First, plaintiff moves to reopen discovery “because [the] discovery process was flawed” 21 | and if discovery is not reopened, his “case will be highly flawed and not winnable.” Mot. □□ □□ A 22 | moving party must show good cause to modify a scheduling order. Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4); 23 | Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 608 (9th Cir. 1992). This standard applies 24 | to requests to reopen discovery. See, e.g., Sheridan v. Reinke, 611 F. App’x 381, 384 (9th Cir. 25 | 2015) (unpublished). Courts consider several…