Kandi v. Management and Training Corporation et al

Filing 32

ORDER DENYING 31 Motion for Stay of Proceedings signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 12/1/2017. (Sant Agata, S)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 EMIEL A. KANDI, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 15 ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR STAY OF PROCEEDINGS v. (ECF No. 31) MANAGEMENT AND TRAINING CORPORATION, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff Emiel A. Kandi (“Plaintiff”) is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 17 18 Case No. 1:16-cv-00794-AWI-BAM (PC) pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.1 19 On November 30, 2017, Plaintiff filed a motion to stay all proceedings in this matter due 20 to an impending institutional transfer to an unknown location. (ECF No. 31.) Plaintiff does not 21 specify when this transfer will take place, but requests that the Court stay any further proceedings 22 until notified by Plaintiff of his new address. Plaintiff further requests that the Clerk of the Court 23 hold all mailing to him until notified of Plaintiff’s new address, and states that all of his legal files 24 and materials have been packed for transport and are unavailable. (Id.) The district court “has broad discretion to stay proceedings as an incident to its power to 25 26 27 28 1 Plaintiff’s second amended complaint has not yet been screened, but the Court takes judicial notice that Plaintiff has filed his complaint in part under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Generally, suits against federal officers for the violation of constitutional rights should be filed under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). 1 1 control its own docket.” Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681, 706 (1997) (citing Landis v. N. Amer. 2 Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254 (1936)). The party seeking the stay bears the burden of establishing the 3 need to stay the action. Clinton, 520 U.S. at 708. 4 Plaintiff has not met his burden of establishing the need to stay this action. Plaintiff 5 appears to be concerned about missing mail from the Court related to this case while he is in 6 transit, but he has not provided any indication of the extent of the requested stay, including his 7 anticipated dates of transport. This action is currently in the screening stage, and the Court will 8 screen Plaintiff’s second amended complaint in due course. Nevertheless, Plaintiff should 9 promptly inform the Court of his new address, as required by the Local Rules, so that he does not 10 miss any communications pertaining to this matter. Plaintiff is further informed that he has 11 nothing due at this time. 12 13 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for stay of proceedings (ECF No. 31), is DENIED. 14 15 16 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: /s/ Barbara December 1, 2017 A. McAuliffe _ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 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?