Anderson v. Hansen et al

Filing 61

ORDER denying 57 Motion and 59 Motion signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 1/7/2013. (Lundstrom, T)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10 IREN ANDERSON,

CASE No. 1:09-cv-01924-LJO-MJS (PC)

11
Plaintiff,
12
v.

ORDER DENYING, WITHOUT PREJUDICE,
PLAINTIFF’S MISCELLANEOUS
MOTIONS

13
14 RON D. HANSEN, et al.,

(ECF No. 57, 59)

15
Defendants.
16 ________________________________/
17

Plaintiff Iren Anderson is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

18 pauperis in this civil rights action filed November 2, 2009 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
19 (Compl., ECF No. 1.) This matter proceeds on Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint
20 (Second Am. Compl., ECF No. 19) alleging claims of excessive force against Defendant
21 Hansen, failure to protect against Defendant Hartley, and failure to intervene against
22 Defendant Lewis. (Order Finding Cognizable Claims, ECF No. 20.) Defendants Hansen,
23 Hartley, and Lewis have answered. (Answers, ECF Nos. 25, 43.) Discovery in this
24 matter closed November 1, 2012. (Order Am. Discovery and Scheduling Order, ECF
25 No. 52, at § III(D).) The dispositive motion deadline is January 10, 2013. (Id.)
26

Pending before the Court are Plaintiff’s first at-issue memorandum and trial

27 readiness motion to set the matter for trial (Mot. Set. Trial, ECF No. 57), and motion for
28 subpoena duces tecum for Defendant Hartley to produce video recording at trial. (Mot.
-1-

1 Subpoena, ECF No. 59.)
2

Plaintiff’s instant motions are premature and denied on that basis. The time

3 within which to file dispositive motions has not expired. The Court will set a further
4 schedule for this litigation and provide for trial submittals and motions in due course.
5 Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b).
6

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s first at-issue memorandum

7 and trial readiness motion to set the matter for trial (ECF No. 57) and motion for
8 subpoena duces tecum for Defendant Hartley to produce video recording at trial (ECF
9 No. 59) are DENIED without prejudice.
10
11 IT IS SO ORDERED.
12 Dated:
ci4d6
13

January 7, 2013

Michael J. Seng

/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-