Monclova-Chavez v. McEachern et al

Filing 133

ORDER Striking Motions 131 , 132 , signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 11/27/12. (Verduzco, M)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 MAXIMILIAN MONCLOVA-CHAVEZ, 10 11 12 CASE NO. 1:08-cv-00076-AWI-BAM Plaintiff, ORDER STRIKING MOTIONS v. (ECF Nos. 131, 132) ERIC McEACHERN, et al., 13 Defendants. / 14 15 Plaintiff Maximilian Monclova-Chavez (“Plaintiff”) is a federal prisoner proceeding in this 16 civil action pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 17 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999 (1971), which provides a remedy for violation of civil rights by federal 18 actors. This action is proceeding on the complaint, filed January 15, 2008, against Defendants 19 McEachern,1 Miller, White, and Tincher for excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment. 20 A telephonic trial confirmation hearing is set in this action for January 7, 2013, at 1:30 p.m. 21 before the Honorable Anthony W. Ishii. At the prior telephonic conference, the parties were 22 informed that the deadlines to file motions in limine would be set at a later date. On November 26, 23 2012, Plaintiff filed a motion to preclude improper impeachment and character evidence at trial and 24 a motion on admission of prior testimony with limiting instructions. (ECF Nos. 131, 132.) Once 25 the parties file their joint pretrial statement, a pretrial order shall issue establishing the deadlines to 26 file motions in limine and oppositions to the motions in limine. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motions, 27 28 1 On December 8, 2010, default was entered against Defendant McEachern. (ECF Nos. 71, 72.) 1 1 filed November 26, 2012, are HEREBY STRICKEN FROM THE RECORD. 2 3 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: 10c20k November 27, 2012 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 5 6 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?