Ahdom v. Lopez et al

Filing 157

ORDER Directing Parties to File Status Reports, signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 10/26/15. 21-Day Deadline. (Gonzalez, R)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8
9

BILAL AHDOM,

10
11
12
13

Plaintiff,
v.
S. LOPEZ, et al.,
Defendants.

14
15

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

1:09-cv-01874-AWI-BAM (PC)
ORDER DIRECTING PARTIES TO FILE
STATUS REPORTS
21-DAY DEADLINE

Plaintiff Bilal Ahdom (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

16

pauperis, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On November 18, 2013,

17

Plaintiff filed his third amended complaint against Defendants M. Araich, C. Chen, Shittu,

18

Ashby, S. Lopez, M. Spaeth, and S. Schaefer for deliberate indifference to his medical needs in

19

violation of the Eighth Amendment. (ECF No. 90.) Subsequently, the Defendants filed motions

20

to dismiss. (ECF Nos. 94, 95, 96.)

21

On October 9, 2015, the District Judge ruled on the motions to dismiss, dismissing

22

Defendants Lopez and Spaeth from this action, and dismissing various claims against Defendants

23

Schaefer, Araich, and Ashby. (ECF No. 152.) This action now proceeds on Plaintiff’s claims

24

against Defendants Schaefer, Araich, Chen, Shittu, and Ashby for Eighth Amendment deliberate

25

indifference. (Id.) On October 21, 2015, Defendants Shittu, Chen, and Araich filed an answer to

26

Plaintiff’s third amended complaint. (ECF No. 154.) The next day, October 22, 2015, Defendant

27

Schaefer filed her answer to Plaintiff’s third amended complaint. (ECF No. 155.) Finally, on

28
1

1

October 23, 2015, Defendant Ashby filed his answer to Plaintiff’s third amended complaint.

2

(ECF No. 156.)

3

While the motions to dismiss were pending, the Court vacated the deadlines in its earlier

4

discovery and scheduling order. (ECF No. 70.) To move this matter forward, the Court shall

5

issue an amended discovery and scheduling order for the completion of discovery and the filing

6

of dispositive motions. In order to set appropriate dates, the Court needs information from the

7

parties concerning how much discovery is left to complete, if any, and how much time the parties

8

anticipate that they need to complete discovery and prepare pre-trial dispositive motions, if any.

9

As a result, the Court orders the parties to file status reports. Defendants shall file a joint

10

status report, and Plaintiff may file his own report. The parties shall inform the court of the

11

following: (a) whether they believe a settlement conference is likely to be helpful at this time;

12

(b) how much time they anticipate they need to complete discovery, and the reason(s) why; (c) a

13

proposed deadline for the completion of all discovery, including filing motions to compel; (d) a

14

proposed deadline for filing pre-trial dispositive motions; and (e) any other scheduling issue the

15

parties believe the Court should be advised about.

16

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

17

1.

Plaintiff may file a status report, and Defendants shall file a joint status report,

18

informing the Court of the following: (a) whether they believe a settlement conference is likely

19

to be helpful at this time; (b) how much time they anticipate they need to complete discovery,

20

and the reason(s) why; (c) a proposed deadline for the completion of all discovery, including

21

filing motions to compel; (d) a proposed deadline for filing pre-trial dispositive motions; and (e)

22

any other scheduling issue the parties believe the Court should be advised about; and

23

2.

The parties’ reports shall be filed and served within twenty-one (21) days of the

24

date of service of this order.

25

IT IS SO ORDERED.

26

Dated:

/s/ Barbara

October 26, 2015

27

A. McAuliffe

_

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

28
2