Ortega v. Kelly et al

Filing 40

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 10/08/09 ordering that plaintiff's 09/30/09 motion 38 is denied without prejudice to refiling following adjudication of any dispositive motion or upon the expiration of time for filing such a motion. (Plummer, M)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 vs. DAVID RAMIREZ, et al., Defendants. / Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On September 30, 2009, plaintiff filed a second motion for a court order requiring the attendance of two incarcerated witnesses at trial. Similar to plaintiff's previous motion to obtain the attendance of incarcerated witnesses at trial, his pending motion is premature. The deadline for filing dispositive motions has not passed. ///// ///// ///// ///// ///// 1 ORDER IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA NOEL FELIX ORTEGA, Plaintiff, No. CIV S-07-2095 DAD P

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
DAD:9 orte2095.witn(2)

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's September 30, 2009 motion (Doc. No. 38) is denied without prejudice to refiling following adjudication of any dispositive motion or upon the expiration of time for filing such a motion. DATED: October 8, 2009.

2