Collier v. State of California
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Cynthia Ann Bashant (author)
Analysis
The parties filed a joint motion to stay proceedings and modify the scheduling order due to difficulties caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. The court granted the motion, staying all deadlines and requiring the parties to file joint status reports every 30 days.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Joint Motion to Stay Proceedings and Modify the Scheduling Order granted“GRANTS the Joint Motion. All dates set forth in the scheduling order (ECF No. 20) are STAYED.” | agree with court The court correctly applied the standard for modifying a scheduling order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b)(4), which requires a showing of good cause. The order recites that the parties are experiencing significant difficulties due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, including the inability to work in offices and delays in obtaining documents. These facts constitute a valid showing of good cause for a temporary stay. The requirement for periodic joint reports is a reasonable procedural mechanism to ensure the case does not remain indefinitely stalled without oversight. |
The order itself: sound — The order is procedurally sound. It correctly identifies the governing rule (Rule 16(b)(4)) and the relevant case law (Johnson) for modifying a scheduling order. The court finds good cause based on the specific factual circumstances of the pandemic and the parties' joint request. The imposition of a reporting requirement is a standard and appropriate condition for a stay to prevent undue delay.
Opinion
5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 KAI COLLIER, Case No. 19-cv-1599-BAS-RBM 11 Plaintiffs, ORDER GRANTING JOINT 12 MOTION TO STAY PROCEEDINGS 13 v. [ECF No. 21] 14 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al.
15 Defendants.
16 17 Presently before the Court is Plaintiff Kai Collier and Defendants J. Romero, 18 J. Huerta, and the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s Joint 19 Motion to Stay Proceedings and Modify the Scheduling Order. (ECF No. 21.) Due 20 to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, the parties’ attorneys are having difficulty 21 complying with the scheduling order. Counsel are unable to go into the office to 22 work and are attempting to work remotely. Defendants’ counsel also is experiencing 23 delays obtaining documents and information from CDCR. Accordingly, the parties 24 move to stay all deadlines in the scheduling order. 25 A scheduling order may be modified only upon a showing of good cause and 26 by leave of Court. Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4); Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 27 975 F.2d 604, 609 (describing the factors a court should consider in ruling on such a | GRANTS the Joint Motion. All dates set forth in the scheduling order (ECF No. 20) 2 ||are STAYED. As stipulated, 30 days from the date of this order, and then every 30 3 || days thereafter, the parties are to file a joint report updating the Court on their current 4 || working conditions and abilities to properly litigate this case. 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. 6 || DATED: March 24, 2020 (iy this ( Ly) han. □ 7 Hon. Cynthia Bashant United States District Judge 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28