Crim v. Management & Training Corp. et al

Filing 39

ORDER for Plaintiff to Either: (1) Respond in Writing That He Intends to Litigate This Case, OR (2) File a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal of This Case, signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 5/8/17. Ten Day Deadline. (Marrujo, C)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JOHN MICHAEL CRIM,
Plaintiff,

12

v.

13
14

1:12-cv-01340-AWI-GSA-PC
ORDER FOR PLAINTIFF TO EITHER:
(1) RESPOND IN WRITING THAT HE
INTENDS TO LITIGATE THIS CASE, OR

MANAGEMENT & TRAINING
CORP., et al.,

15

(2) FILE A NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY
DISMISSAL OF THIS CASE

Defendants.
16

TEN DAY DEADLINE

17
18
19

I.

DISCUSSION

20

John Michael Crim (“Plaintiff”) is a former federal prisoner proceeding pro se with this

21

civil action. On June 12, 2012, Plaintiff filed the Complaint commencing this action in the Kern

22

County Superior Court. On August 16, 2012, defendants removed the case to federal court.

23

(ECF No. 1.) Plaintiff named defendants Management & Training Corp., Adler, Stewart,

24

Mann, McDonough, Patrick, Logan, McBride, and Sy, and brought claims for threat and

25

coercion in violation of the Fifth Amendment, loss of privilege under the Fourteenth

26

Amendment, discrimination, threat to loss of liberty, loss of property and fear of transfer in

27

violation of the Fifth Amendment, conspiracy, loss of freedom of expression under the First

28

Amendment, and false imprisonment. Plaintiff alleged in the Complaint that defendants falsely
1

1

found him guilty of insolence, took away his property and privileges, housed him in the SHU,

2

and intimidated him at his new job. On November 26, 2014, the case was dismissed for failure

3

to state a claim for denial of access to the courts, with prejudice, and judgment was entered on

4

the same day. (ECF Nos. 29, 30.)

5

On December 17, 2014, Plaintiff filed a notice of appeal to the Ninth Circuit. (ECF No.

6

31.) On April 12, 2017, the Ninth Circuit reversed the dismissal of this case and remanded it to

7

the district court. (ECF No. 37.) The Ninth Circuit’s mandate was issued on May 4, 2017.

8

(ECF No. 96.) The Ninth Circuit directed the district court to consider Plaintiff’s Complaint

9

independently of his motion for library access. Accordingly, the court has reopened this case

10

for further proceedings.

11

At this stage of the proceedings, the court shall require Plaintiff to respond in writing to

12

this order within ten (10) days, either: (1) indicating that he intends to litigate this case, or (2)

13

filing a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal of this case.

14

II.

15
16

CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that within ten (10) days of the

date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall either:

17

(1)

respond in writing that he intends to litigate this case, or

18

(2)

file a Notice of Voluntarily Dismissal of this case.

19
20
21
22

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

May 8, 2017

/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

23
24
25
26
27
28
2