Brian C. Applegate v. Nkwocha et al
Filing
22
ORDER VACATING February 16, 2017 Telephonic Status Conference, signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 02/13/2017. (Martin-Gill, S)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
BRIAN C. APPLEGATE,
12
Plaintiff,
13
14
15
CASE No. 1:16-cv-00490-MJS (PC)
ORDER
VACATING
STATUS CONFERENCE
TELEPHONIC
v.
(ECF NO. 17)
PHILIP NKWOCHA, et al.,
Defendants.
16
17
18
19
20
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil
21
rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The action proceeds on Plaintiff’s
22
complaint against Defendant Nkwocha for the following claims: Eighth Amendment
23
excessive force, Eighth Amendment conditions of confinement, Fourteenth Amendment
24
Equal Protection, First Amendment retaliation, violation of the Ralph Civil Rights Act,
25
violation of the Bane Act, violation of California Government Code § 845.6, intentional
26
infliction of emotional distress, assault, and battery.
27
28
1
Defendant Nkwocha waived service. (ECF No. 15.) On the date his answer was
2
due, he filed a motion for leave to file a pre-answer motion for summary judgment based
3
on exhaustion and a motion for extension of time to respond to the complaint. (ECF No.
4
16.) The Court denied the request to file a pre-answer motion for summary judgment on
5
the ground that such a motion was unlikely to promote efficiency in the instant case.
6
(ECF No. 17.) Defendant since has filed his answer. (ECF No. 18.)
7
In the order denying Defendant’s motion, the Court noted that Plaintiff alleged in
8
his complaint that he had filed a mandamus action in the Superior Court of Sacramento
9
seeking to require CDCR to process his administrative grievance. Plaintiff has raised
10
similar allegations in other actions and, as a result, those actions have been stayed. See
11
Applegate v. Moreno, Case No. 1:15-cv-1473-LJO-MJS (E.D. Cal. Aug. 19, 2016)
12
(minute order staying proceedings) and (E.D. Cal. Jan. 4, 2017) (minute order continuing
13
stay); Applegate v. Trausch, Case No. 1:15-cv-811-AWI-GSA (E.D. Cal. Mar. 29, 2016)
14
(staying proceedings) and (E.D. Cal. July 25, 2016) (continuing stay). Accordingly, the
15
Court ordered the parties to brief the issue of whether the instant matter should be
16
stayed in light of Plaintiff’s pending mandamus action, and also set a telephonic status
17
conference on February 16, 2017 to address the issue. (ECF No. 17.)
18
Neither party opposes a stay pending resolution of Plaintiff’s mandamus petition.
19
(ECF Nos. 19, 21.) At the same time, however, both parties state that a stay is
20
unnecessary. (Id.) Plaintiff explains that there will be a hearing on the merits of his
21
petition is May 19, 2017. (ECF No. 19.) He contends that, even if the Superior Court
22
rules against him, its ruling is not dispositive of the exhaustion issue before this Court. In
23
any event, he asserts that he has presented evidence in the mandamus proceeding, and
24
can present such evidence in this action, to refute Defendant’s exhaustion defense.
25
Defendant, on the other hand, contends that evidence before the Court in the
26
mandamus proceeding demonstrates that Plaintiff failed to exhaust prior to bringing suit.
27
(ECF No. 21.)
28
2
1
In light of the parties’ positions, the Court concludes that the February 16, 2017
2
telephonic status conference is no longer necessary and that a stay of the matter is
3
unwarranted. Accordingly, the February 16, 2017 status conference is HEREBY
4
VACATED. The Court separately will issue a scheduling order setting a schedule for
5
further litigation of this action.
6
7
8
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
February 13, 2017
/s/
9
Michael J. Seng
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
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?