Davis v. Walker et al

Filing 83

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 02/09/15 denying 80 Motion to Amend. Within 30 days of the date of this order, the parties are directed to meet and confer on a date for a status conference and contact Pete Buzo, the court deputy of the undersigned magistrate judge, a [e-mail], with an agreeable date. (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

KENNARD LEE DAVIS,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 2:10-cv-2139 KJM DAD P

v.

ORDER

JAMES WALKER et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding through appointed counsel and with an appointed

17
18

guardian ad litem (“GAL”). Before the court appointed plaintiff’s counsel and GAL, plaintiff

19

filed a motion to amend his complaint. In light of the court’s appointments, the court will deny

20

plaintiff’s pro se motion to amend without prejudice to the renewal of that motion by counsel. In

21

addition, by separate order, the court will set this matter for a status conference and permit

22

telephonic appearance. Before doing so, however, the court will direct the parties to meet and

23

confer and contact the undersigned’s courtroom deputy with a mutually agreeable date for that

24

status conference.

25

/////

26

/////

27

/////

28

/////
1

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

2

1.

3

2. Within thirty days of the date of this order, the parties are directed to meet and confer

Plaintiff’s motion to amend (Doc. No. 90) is denied without prejudice; and

4

on a date for a status conference and contact Pete Buzo, the court deputy of the

5

undersigned magistrate judge, at [e-mail], with an agreeable date.

6

Dated: February 9, 2015

7
8
9

DAD:9
davi2139.10d

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2