Sharonoff v. California Department of Corrections et al

Filing 22

ORDER DENYING Plaintiff's Motion to Stay Action 21 , signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 6/30/16. (Hellings, J)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

KENNETH ALLEN SHARONOFF,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 1:15-cv-00799 DLB PC
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION TO STAY ACTION

v.
(Document 21)
MONTOYOA, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
Plaintiff Kenneth Allen Sharonoff (“Plaintiff”) is a California state prisoner proceeding

17
18

pro se and in forma pauperis in this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed this action

19

on May 27, 2015, and it is proceeding on his January 20, 2016, Third Amended Complaint.

20

Defendants’ responsive pleading is currently due on or before July 23, 2016.

21

On June 27, 2016, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting that this action be stayed, or held in

22

abeyance, so that he can exhaust and “conform to rule 56.” ECF No. 21, at 1.
The Court will not stay an action while Plaintiff exhausts his administrative remedies, as

23
24

administrative remedies must have been exhausted prior to filing in this Court. McKinney v.

25

Carey, 311 F.3d 1198, 1199-1201 (9th Cir. 2002). Plaintiff may not exhaust while the suit is

26

pending. McKinney, 311 F.3d at 1199-1201.

27

///

28

///
1

1
2

To the extent Plaintiff cites Rule 56, he may move for discovery under Rule 56 if and
when Defendants file a motion for summary judgment based on the failure to exhaust.

3
4
5

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Dennis

June 30, 2016

L. Beck

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2