Jacobs v. Sullivan et al

Filing 125

ORDER for Defense Counsel to Continue Filing Quarterly Status Reports pursuant to Court's Order of April 24, 2013, signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 6/26/14. (Verduzco, M)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 12 13 14 15 1:05-cv-01625-LJO-GSA-PC GEORGE E. JACOBS IV, Plaintiff, ORDER FOR DEFENSE COUNSEL TO CONTINUE FILING QUARTERLY STATUS REPORTS PURSUANT TO COURT’S ORDER OF APRIL 24, 2013 (Doc. 118.) vs. W. J. SULLIVAN, et al., Defendants. 16 17 18 Plaintiff George E. Jacobs IV (APlaintiff@) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in 19 forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ' 1983. This action now 20 proceeds on the Third Amended Complaint filed by Plaintiff on May 5, 2010, against 21 defendants Crotty, Nelson, Watson, Chan, McGregor, Alexander, Carrasco, Blankenship, Jobb, 22 Granillo, Johnson, and Salazar aka Adams, for violation of Plaintiff=s rights under the Eighth 23 Amendment. (Doc. 29.) 24 On April 24, 2013, the court issued an order staying the trial in this action pending 25 resolution of defendant Crotty’s bankruptcy proceedings, and requiring defense counsel to file 26 quarterly status reports informing the court and Plaintiff of the status of defendant Crotty’s 27 bankruptcy proceedings. (Doc. 118.) Defense counsel filed status reports on June 4, 2013, 28 September 13, 2013, December 16, 2013, and March 17, 2014. (Docs. 119, 122, 123, 124.) 1 1 However, to date the court has not received the next quarterly status report. Defense counsel is 2 reminded of the requirement to continue filing status reports pursuant to the court’s order. 3 4 5 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: June 26, 2014 /s/ Gary S. Austin UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?