(PC)Howell v. Randolph et al

Filing 24

ORDER GRANTING 22 Defendants' Motion to Opt Out of the ADR Project; ORDER Lifting Stay; and ORDER Directing Clerk of Court to Issue Discovery and Scheduling Order signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 10/14/2020. (Jessen, A)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 KAREEM J. HOWELL, Case No. 1:19-cv-0735-NONE-JLT (PC) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO OPTOUT OF THE ADR PROJECT; 14 A. RANDOLPH, et al., ORDER LIFTING STAY; AND 15 16 ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO ISSUE DISCOVERY AND SCHEDULING ORDER 17 (Doc. 22) 18 Defendants. Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel, with a civil rights complaint 19 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff brings a First Amendment retaliation claim against 20 Correctional Officers Rodriguez, Randolph, and Burnes, and a Fourteenth Amendment Due 21 Process claim against Rodriguez and Randolph. On October 14, 2020, defendants filed a motion 22 to opt out of the post-screening ADR project. After reviewing the motion, the Court finds good 23 cause to grant defendants’ motion. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS as follows: 24 25 1. Defendants’ motion to opt out (Doc. 22) is GRANTED, and the stay of this action is LIFTED; 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// 1 1 2. The Clerk of Court is directed to issue a Discovery and Scheduling Order in this case. 2 3 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: October 14, 2020 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 5 6 7 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?