Free Motion to Amend/Correct - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:04-cv-00177-SLR

Document 37

Filed 11/30/2005

Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

EDDIE TAYLOR

vs. CIVIGENICS, INC.

: Plaintiff, : : : : : Defendants. :

NO. 04-177-SLR

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

MOTION OF DEFENDANT CIVIGENICS TO AMEND CASE SCHEDULING ORDER Defendant, Civigenics, Inc., by and through their attorneys, Reger Rizzo Kavulich & Darnall LLP and Deasey, Mahoney & Bender, Ltd., respectfully file this Motion to Amend Case Scheduling Order, Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b). Defendant avers the following in support thereof: 1. This action was initiated by the Pro Se Plaintiff when the Complaint was filed on March 23, 2004. Plaintiff alleges that his civil rights were violated during his incarceration. 2. By Order dated August 4, 2005, this Honorable Court denied moving Defendant's Motion to Dismiss the Complaint and entered a Scheduling Order which imposed Discovery and Dispositive Motion deadlines. 3. Under the original Case Scheduling Order, Discovery is required to be completed by December 2, 2005 and Dispositive Motions are due by January 3, 2006. A true and correct copy of this Honorable Court's Order dated August 4, 2005 is attached here to as Exhibit "A". 4. Promptly after the entry of the Scheduling Order, moving Defendant filed a Motion for leave to take a deposition of the Plaintiff, who was incarcerated. That Motion was granted the this Honorable Court.

Case 1:04-cv-00177-SLR

Document 37

Filed 11/30/2005

Page 2 of 3

5. After several unsuccessful attempts to complete the deposition, the Plaintiff's deposition was ultimately completed on November 21, 2005 at the Howard R. Young Correctional Facility. 6. During the course of his deposition, Plaintiff referenced various records and documents in the possession of his mother that directly relate to the claims at issue in this case. These records had not previously been identified or produced in the case. Moreover, Plaintiff identified for the first time at his deposition several rehabilitative facilities at which he had received treatment. The records from these facilities contain relevant and discoverable evidence which are important to the defense of this case. 7. Because of the rapid approach of the discovery deadline as identified in the original Case Scheduling Order, moving Defendant is requesting a thirty day extension of all deadlines identified in the original Case Scheduling Order. The thirty day extension will allow the Defendant to obtain the additional records and documentation identified for the first time at Plaintiff's recent deposition. 8. The Defendant has acted promptly and diligently in attempting to effectuate all necessary discovery within the deadlines identified by the original Case Scheduling Order. This request for an extension of those deadlines is necessitated as a result of Plaintiff's failure to timely identify and produce the discoverable information identified above, as required by Rule 26. 9. The thirty day extension of all deadlines in this case will not result in prejudice to the parties. 10. Therefore, the Defendant respectfully requests that the Case Scheduling Order be amended to extend all deadlines by thirty days.

Case 1:04-cv-00177-SLR

Document 37

Filed 11/30/2005

Page 3 of 3

Respectfully submitted, REGER RIZZO KAVULICH & DARNALL LLP Dated: November 30, 2005 By: /s/ Louis J. Rizzo , Jr. Louis J. Rizzo, Jr., Esquire 1001 Jefferson Street, Suite 202 Wilmington, DE 19801 (302)652-3611 (Phone) (302)652-3620 (Facsimile)

Carla P. Maresca, Esquire DEASEY MAHONEY & BENDER, LTD. Suite 1300 1800 John F. Kennedy Boulevard Philadelphia, PA 19103-2978 (215) 587-9400, ext. 135 (Phone) (215) 587-9456 (Facsimile) Attorneys for Defendant, Civigenics