Legal Opinion

Marvin Cardenas v. Butler, et al.

District Court, E.D. California

Decided December 16, 2025No. 2:23-cv-00500Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 MARVIN CARDENAS, No. 2:23-cv-0500 TLN AC P 11 Plaintiff, 12 v. ORDER 13 BUTLER, et al., 14 Defendants. 15 16 Plaintiff has filed a motion seeking an extension of 45-69 days to file motions to compel. 17 ECF No. 49. Defendants have not filed an opposition. Because this request, if granted, would 18 also require a modification to the deadline to file dispositive motions, the court construes this 19 motion as a motion to modify the discovery and scheduling order. 20 To prevail on a request to amend a…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Houston v. LackSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
  2. Michael Wayne Jenkins v. Dan Johnson, SuperintendentCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
  3. Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. BardsleyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1927

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API