Blacher v. Johnson et al

Filing 68

ORDER on Plaintiff's 66 Petition for Reissuance of all Details Concerning Initial Disclosures/Relief from any Unintended Default signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 10/31/2016. (Sant Agata, S)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 1:12-cv-01159-EPG (PC) MARLON BLACHER, 9 ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S PETITION FOR REISSUANCE OF ALL DETAILS CONCERNING INITIAL DISCLOSURES/RELIEF FROM ANY UNINTENDED DEFAULT (ECF NO. 66) Plaintiff, 10 v. 11 S. JOHNSON, 12 Defendant. 13 14 15 Marlon Blacher (APlaintiff@) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis 16 in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ' 1983. On October 17, 2016, Plaintiff filed a 17 petition for reissuance of all details concerning initial disclosures/relief from any unintended 18 default. (ECF No. 66). 19 According to Plaintiff, on September 10, 2016, he was put in administrative 20 segregation. When being placed in administrative segregation, several correctional officers 21 packed Plaintiff’s possessions into boxes, disrupting the order with in which Plaintiff’s legal 22 documents were arranged. On or about October 3, 2016, Plaintiff was transferred to California 23 State Prison-Solano. Shortly after arriving, Plaintiff was forced, by means of duress and undue 24 influence, to discard many of the legal documents in his possession, including the Order 25 Requiring Initial Disclosures and Setting Mandatory Scheduling Conference. 26 The Court does not make any findings regarding Plaintiff’s allegations. However, 27 because Plaintiff needs a copy of the Order Requiring Initial Disclosures and Setting 28 Mandatory Scheduling Conference (ECF No. 51), and because he apparently no longer has the 1 1 document in his possession, the Court will order that a copy be provided. However, the Court 2 will not issue a blanket order forgiving Plaintiff for all potential defaults. If after reviewing the 3 Order Requiring Initial Disclosures and Setting Mandatory Scheduling Conference Plaintiff 4 determines that he needs relief from a deadline that he missed, he can file a motion requesting 5 that relief. However, as the Court noted on the record at the scheduling conference on October 6 31, 2016, the Court will excuse Plaintiff’s failure to file a scheduling conference statement. 7 8 9 ACCORDINGLY, it is ordered: 1. Plaintiff’s request for a copy of the Order Requiring Initial Disclosures and Setting Mandatory Scheduling Conference is GRANTED; 10 2. Plaintiff’s request to be excused from all potential defaults is GRANTED with respect 11 to Plaintiff’s failure to file a scheduling conference statement and DENIED as to any 12 other missed deadlines; and 13 14 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to send Plaintiff a copy of the Order Requiring Initial Disclosures and Setting Mandatory Scheduling Conference (ECF No. 51). 15 16 17 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: October 31, 2016 /s/ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 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?