Trujillo v. Sherman
Filing
17
ORDER denying 15 Motion for presentation of Exhibits signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 3/2/2015. (Lundstrom, T)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
GUILLERMO TRUJILLO,
12
13
14
15
Plaintiff,
v.
STU SHERMAN, et al.,
Defendants.
16
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No.: 1:14-cv-01401-BAM (PC)
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR
PRESENTATION OF EXHIBITS
(ECF No. 15)
17
18
Plaintiff Guillermo Trujillo (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma
19
pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff initiated this action on
20
September 8, 2014.
21
22
23
24
25
On February 11, 2015, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motions to supplement and amend his
complaint. Plaintiff’s amended complaint is due on or before March 16, 2015.
On February 23, 2015, Plaintiff filed a motion for presentation of exhibits. It appears that
Plaintiff would like to file exhibits regarding his administrative appeals. (ECF No. 15.)
As stated in the First Informational Order issued on September 10, 2014, the Court will not
26
serve as a repository for evidence. Parties may not file evidence with the Court until it becomes
27
necessary to do so in connection with a motion for summary judgment, trial or the Court requests
28
otherwise. (ECF No. 4, p. 3.) Currently, this action is at the screening stage and it is not necessary for
1
1
Plaintiff to submit evidence in connection with a motion for summary judgment or trial. Accordingly,
2
Plaintiff’s motion for presentation of evidence is HEREBY DENIED. Plaintiff is advised that
3
evidence improperly submitted to the Court may be stricken/returned.
4
IT IS SO ORDERED.
5
6
Dated:
/s/ Barbara
March 2, 2015
A. McAuliffe
_
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?