Dillingham v. Garcia et al

Filing 62

ORDER Re: Plaintiff's 61 Motion for Administrative Relief, signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 7/31/19. (Gonzalez, R)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 JERRY DILLINGHAM, Case No. 1:18-cv-00579-LJO-EPG (PC) 11 Plaintiff, 12 v. ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF 13 F. GARCIA, (ECF NO. 61) 14 Defendant. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Jerry Dillingham (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se1 and in forma pauperis with this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On July 29, 2019, Plaintiff filed a motion for administrative relief in which he seeks appointment of attorney Christian F. Pereira for purposes of settlement. (ECF No. 61.) Plaintiff’s request is denied as moot because Mr. Pereira has already been appointed to 22 represent Plaintiff for purposes of settlement. (See ECF No. 51 (appointing Christian F. Pereira as 23 Plaintiff’s limited purpose counsel for “the limited purpose of assisting Plaintiff prepare for and 24 participate in a settlement conference, to set a settlement conference, and to stay the case pending 25 the outcome of the settlement conference”).) This limited purpose representation includes the 26 drafting of documents related to the settlement conference, such as Plaintiff’s settlement 27 statement. 28 1 Christian Pereira has been appointed as limited purpose counsel to assist Plaintiff with preparing for and participating in a settlement conference. (ECF No. 51.) 1 1 To the extent Plaintiff is seeking a 30 day continuance of the settlement conference, his 2 request is denied. The settlement conference will proceed as scheduled on August 27, 2019, at 3 9:00 a.m., with Christian F. Pereira representing Plaintiff for purposes of settlement. 4 5 6 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: July 31, 2019 /s/ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 8 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?