Harrison v. Adams, et al

Filing 249

ORDER Denying 242 Plaintiff's Motion for a Scheduling Order and for Ruling on Motion for Summary Judgment, signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 6/19/15. (Gonzalez, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

MICHAEL D. HARRISON,

12
13
14

Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 1:08-cv-1065-AWI-MJS (PC)
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
FOR A SCHEDULING ORDER AND FOR
RULING ON MOTION FOR SUMMARRY
JUDGMENT(ECF No. 242)

15
16
17

T. MOORE, et al.,
Defendants.

18
19
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil
20
21
22

rights action brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1983. The action proceeds on Plaintiff’s
Eighth Amendment claims against numerous defendants. (ECF No. 160.)

23

On June 1, 2015, Plaintiff requested the Court to rule on Defendants’ motion for

24

summary judgment and to set a new scheduling order to “allow this matter to proceed.”

25
26

(ECF No. 242.)
The Magistrate Judge issued findings and recommendations on the motion for

27
28

summary judgment on June 17, 2015 (ECF No. 247), and the District Judge will review

1

them in due course. It is not appropriate to set the case for trial until this motion has

2

been resolved.

3

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion for a scheduling order and for rulling on motion for

4
summary judgment (ECF No. 242) is DENIED.
5
6
7

IT IS SO ORDERED.

8
Dated:

June 19, 2015

/s/

9

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Michael J. Seng

2