Zochlinski v. Regents of the University of California, et al

Filing 93

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 2/16/2016 ORDERING that the court will defer consideration of plaintiff's pending 90 motion for sanctions, 91 motion to substitute, and 92 request to use electronic filing until after t he pending 83 findings and recommendations have been resolved. Defendants are not required to file an opposition or otherwise respond to plaintiff's motions or request until directed by the court to do so via subsequent order. The 3/17/2016 hearing regarding plaintiff's motion for sanctions and motion to substitute is VACATED. (Zignago, K.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

HOWARD ALAN ZOCHLINSKI,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14
15

No. 2:10-cv-1824-KJM-KJN (PS)

ORDER

v.
REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF
CALIFORNIA, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17

On February 9, 2016, plaintiff filed a motion for sanctions and motion to substitute the

18
19

deceased defendant John Jones with his daughter, his purported sole surviving heir, pursuant to

20

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(a)(1), both of which are currently scheduled for hearing on

21

March 17, 2016. (ECF Nos. 90, 91.) On that same day, plaintiff also filed a request to use the

22

court’s electronic filing system in this action. (ECF No. 92.) In light of the pending findings and

23

recommendations issued on November 4, 2015, recommending that defendants’ motion to

24

dismiss be granted and this entire action be dismissed with prejudice (ECF No. 83), and in the

25

interest of preserving scarce judicial resources, the court finds it appropriate to defer

26

consideration of plaintiff’s two motions and request until the pending findings and

27

recommendations have been resolved by the assigned district judge.

28

////
1

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

2

1.

The court will defer consideration of plaintiff’s pending motion for sanctions (ECF

3

No. 90), motion to substitute (ECF No. 91),1 and request to use electronic filing (ECF No. 92)

4

until after the pending findings and recommendations (ECF No. 83) have been resolved.

5

Defendants are not required to file an opposition or otherwise respond to plaintiff’s motions or

6

request until directed by the court to do so via subsequent order.

7

2.

The March 17, 2016 hearing regarding plaintiff’s motion for sanctions and motion

8

to substitute is VACATED. After resolution of the pending findings and recommendations, if the

9

court determines that a hearing is necessary, it will schedule one via a subsequent order.

10
11

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: February 16, 2016

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

1

While the court declines to consider the merits of plaintiff’s motion for substitution at this
juncture, it recognizes that plaintiff’s motion has been timely filed within the 90-day period
required under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(a)(1).
2