Cortinas v. Gill, Jr. et al

Filing 53

ORDER DENYING Plaintiff's Ex Parte 51 Motion for Discovery and Scheduling Order signed by Magistrate Judge Helena M. Barch-Kuchta on 9/4/2021. (Sant Agata, S)

Download PDF
Case 1:18-cv-00515-NONE-HBK Document 53 Filed 09/07/21 Page 1 of 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 LARRY WILLIAMS CORTINAS, 12 13 14 15 Plaintiff, v. RAVIJOT GILL, JR., et al., Case No. 1:18-cv-00515-NONE-HBK ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S EX PARTE MOTION FOR DISCOVERY AND SCHEDULING ORDER (Doc. No. 51) Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Larry Williams Cortinas, a state prisoner, is proceeding on his first amended 18 complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Doc. No. 17). Defendants moved to the dismiss 19 the complaint. (Doc. No. 28). On September 1, 2021, the undersigned issued findings and 20 recommendations to grant Defendants’ motion to dismiss. (Doc. No. 52). Before the Court is 21 Plaintiff’s ex parte motion for discovery and scheduling order, filed August 30, 2021. (Doc. No. 22 51). Plaintiff states that he needs to engage in discovery to “present evidence. [sic] On issues that 23 require a response.” (Id. at 1). Plaintiff states that he wishes “to present this case for trial.” (Id.). 24 The Court will deny Plaintiff’s motion for discovery and scheduling order without 25 prejudice. Because findings and recommendations to grant Defendants’ motion to dismiss are 26 pending before the District Court, the Court will not issue a discovery and scheduling order at this 27 time. If the findings and recommendations are not adopted by the District Court, the case will 28 proceed to discovery. The Court will issue a scheduling and discovery order at that time. Case 1:18-cv-00515-NONE-HBK Document 53 Filed 09/07/21 Page 2 of 2 1 Further, Plaintiff is advised that he should refrain from filing such ex parte motions. In 2 accordance with Local Rule 135(d), “copies of all documents submitted to the Court shall be 3 served upon all parties to the action.” 4 Accordingly, it is ORDERED: 5 Plaintiff’s motion for discovery and scheduling order (Doc. No. 51) is DENIED. 6 7 8 Dated: September 4, 2021 HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 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?