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)
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?