Armstead v. Virga et al

Filing 75

ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 3/4/13 ORDERING that Plaintiff's 1/10/13 REQUEST for Reconsideration 70 is DENIED; Plaintiff's 1/10/13 REQUEST for STAY of this action is GRANTED; This Action is STAYED for a period of four months; within four months from the date of this order, Plaintiff shall file a status report. The 1/09/13 Discovery and Scheduling Order 69 is VACATED. (Mena-Sanchez, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

JAMES ARMSTEAD,

11

Plaintiff,

12
13

No. 2:11-cv-1054 JAM KJN P

vs.
TIM V. VIRGA, et al.,

14

Defendants.

15

ORDER
/

16

Pursuant to this court’s order of July 3, 2012, this action is proceeding on

17

plaintiff’s claims against defendants Virga and Mini: 1) racially-based lockdown in violation of

18

the Equal Protection Clause; 2) denial of access to the telephone; and 3) denial of access to

19

cleaning supplies. (Dkt. No. 51.)

20

On December 3, 2012, the Magistrate Judge issued an order denying plaintiff’s

21

November 13, 2012 motion for an extension of time. On January 10, 2013, plaintiff filed a

22

request for reconsideration of that order. Local Rule 303(b), states “rulings by Magistrate Judges

23

shall be final if no reconsideration thereof is sought from the Court within fourteen days . . . from

24

the date of service of the ruling on the parties. . .” E.D. Local Rule 303(b). Plaintiff’s request for

25

reconsideration of the magistrate judge’s order of December 3, 2012, is therefore untimely and is

26

denied.
1

1

However, in the January 10, 2013 filing, plaintiff states that he is extremely ill,

2

and that until some of his medical concerns are addressed, he is able to see a specialist, or at least

3

not feel so much pain, he will “need to put the matter of this lawsuit on hold.” (Dkt. No. 70 at 3.)

4

Good cause appearing, petitioner’s request for medical delay is granted. The court will stay the

5

instant action for a period of four months. However, plaintiff is cautioned that the court cannot

6

stay this action for an indefinite period. Therefore, at the end of the four month period, plaintiff

7

shall file a status report as to his medical condition, and if plaintiff seeks an additional

8

continuance of the stay, shall file medical documentation supporting such a request. If plaintiff

9

fails to file a status report, the court will lift the stay of this action, and a new scheduling order

10

will issue.

11
12

In light of the four month stay, the January 9, 3013 discovery and scheduling order
is vacated. The court will issue a new order if and when the stay is lifted.

13

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

14

1. Plaintiff’s January 10, 2013 request for reconsideration (Docket No. 70) is

15

denied;

16

2. Plaintiff’s January 10, 2013 request for a stay of this action is granted;

17

3. This action is stayed for a period of four months; within four months from the

18

date of this order, plaintiff shall file a status report as set forth above; if plaintiff fails to file the

19

status report, the stay will be lifted, and a new scheduling order will issue; and

20

4. The January 9, 2013 discovery and scheduling order (dkt. no. 69) is vacated.

21
DATED: March 4, 2013
22
23
24

/s/ John A. Mendez
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

25
26
2