Ford v. Wildey et al
Filing
122
ORDER REGARDING Plaintiff's 121 Motion for Clarification, signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 5/18/2015. (Marrujo, C)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
BENNY FORD,
12
Plaintiff,
13
14
v.
G. WILDEY, et al.,
15
Defendants.
16
Case No.: 1:10-cv-01024-LJO-SAB (PC)
ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION
[ECF No. 121]
Plaintiff Benny Ford is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action
17
18
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
19
On May 15, 2015, Plaintiff filed a motion for clarification relating to pretrial proceedings.
20
On April 13, 2015, the undersigned issued findings and recommendations recommending
21
denial of Defendants’ motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 115.) As stated in the findings and
22
recommendations, the recommendations are submitted to the district judge who may “accept, reject or
23
modify, in whole or in part, the findings and recommendations …” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The
24
Findings and Recommendations have not yet been reviewed by the assigned district judge, and
25
Plaintiff’s motion for clarification as to further proceedings is premature until the resolution of the
26
///
27
///
28
///
1
1
pending findings and recommendations. Thus, Plaintiff’s motion for clarification as to further
2
proceedings is DENIED as premature.
3
4
IT IS SO ORDERED.
5
Dated:
6
May 18, 2015
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?