Ford v. King et al

Filing 43

ORDER DENYING Plaintiff's Motion to Schedule Jury Trial and Mandatory Settlement Conference 42 , signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 1/14/2019. (Hellings, J)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9

DARREN VINCENT FORD,

10
11
12

Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 1:17-cv-00822-DAD-BAM (PC)
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
TO SCHEDULE JURY TRIAL AND
MANDATORY SETTLEMENT
CONFERENCE

KING, et al.,
(ECF No. 42)

13

Defendants.

14
15

Plaintiff Darren Vincent Ford (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in

16

forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed a first

17

amended complaint on October 26, 2018. (ECF No. 34.) The first amended complaint has not

18

yet been screened.

19

Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion to set this case for a jury trial, as well as

20

schedule a mandatory telephonic settlement conference between the Court, Plaintiff, and

21

Defendant, filed January 10, 2019. (ECF No. 42.)

22

Plaintiff’s requests to set this matter for trial and to set this matter for a settlement

23

conference, are premature. As the Court has repeatedly informed Plaintiff in other orders, the

24

Court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against a governmental

25

entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). Plaintiff’s first

26

amended complaint, or any portion thereof, is subject to dismissal if it is frivolous or malicious, if

27

it fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or if it seeks monetary relief from a

28

defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1), (2); 28 U.S.C.
1

1

§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). As the Court has not yet screened Plaintiff’s first amended complaint to

2

determine whether it may proceed on any cognizable claims, and no defendant has yet been

3

served, this action is not ready to set for trial or a settlement conference. Plaintiff’s first amended

4

complaint will be screened in due course.

5
6

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion to set a trial date and to schedule a settlement conference,
(ECF No. 42), is DENIED.

7
8
9

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Barbara

January 14, 2019

A. McAuliffe

_

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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