Bonner v. Gipson et al

Filing 23

ORDER DENYING Plaintiff's 22 Motion to set the case for Trial and Requiring Parties to Advise Whether a Settlement Conference may be Beneficial signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 07/06/2015. (15-Day Deadline) (Martin-Gill, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
Case No. 1:14-cv-00610-LJO-JLT (PC)
11

WILLIAM ROY BONNER,
Plaintiff,

12
13

v.

14

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION
TO SET THE CASE FOR TRIAL AND
REQUIRING PARTIES TO ADVISE
WHETHER A SETTLEMENT
CONFERENCE MAY BE BENEFICIAL

GIPSON, et al.,
(Doc. 22)

15

Defendants.
15-DAY DEADLINE

16
17

Plaintiff is proceeding in this action on that two defendants used excessive force in

18

violation of the Eighth Amendment. (Doc. 12.) The Discovery and Scheduling order issued in

19

this case on December 10, 2014 which set the discovery cut-off date as August 10, 2015 and the

20

dispositive motion filing deadline as October 19, 2015. (Doc. 17.) On June 15, 2015, Plaintiff

21

filed a motion seeking that this case be set for trial. (Doc. 22.)

22

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b)(3)(A), district courts must enter

23

scheduling orders to establish deadlines for, among other things, filing of motions and completion

24

of discovery. Scheduling orders may also Aset dates for pretrial conferences and for trial.@

25

F.R.Civ.P. 16(b)(3)(B)(v). AA schedule may be modified only for good cause and with the

26

judge=s consent.@ F.R.Civ.P. 16(b)(4). The scheduling order Acontrols the course of the action

27

unless the court modifies it.@ F.R.Civ.P. 16(d).

28

In pro se inmate cases, this Court's usual practice is to issue a discovery and scheduling
1

1

order and to set a trial date after dispositive motions have been filed and decided. Plaintiff's

2

skeletal motion fails to state any reasons why he feels the case should not follow the normal

3

course. Likewise, he fails to even attempt to show good cause to modify the Discovery and

4

Scheduling order and, given that any party is entitled to file a dispositive motion, which must be

5

decided before trial, this failure is fatal to Plaintiff’s request. See Fed. R. Civ.P. 56.

6

However, if both sides desire, a settlement conference may be scheduled without

7

necessitating a showing of good cause as required to modify the discovery and scheduling order.

8

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

9

1.

10

Plaintiff's motion to set a trial date in this case, filed on June 15, 2015 (Doc. 22), is
DENIED; and

11

2.

within 15 days of the date of service of this order, the parties SHALL notify the

12

Court whether they believe, in good faith, that settlement is a possibility in this

13

case and whether they are interested in having a settlement conference scheduled.1

14
15

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

16

July 6, 2015

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

It is noted that Plaintiff submitted a confidential settlement statement that was received with his motion to set the
case for trial which will be retained by the Court for use if a settlement conference is scheduled, but will be destroyed
if the Defendants are not interested in a settlement conference at this time.

2