Jackson v. Pletcher et al
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 4/1/14 RECOMMENDING that plaintiffs motion to stay this action (ECF No. 226) be denied. Referred to Judge John A. Mendez; Objections to F&R due within 14 days.(Dillon, M)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
RAYMOND D. JACKSON,
No. 2: 11-cv-1157 JAM KJN P
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
STEVEN PLETCHER, et al.,
Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding through counsel, with a civil rights action pursuant
to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. For the following reasons, the undersigned recommends that plaintiff’s
motion to stay (ECF No. 226) be denied.
On November 6, 2013, the court granted defendants’ motion to dismiss except for the
claim that defendant Osman provided inadequate medical care. (ECF No. 220.) On November
21, 2013, plaintiff filed a notice of appeal of the November 6, 2013 order. (ECF No. 222.) On
December 12, 2013, defendant Osman filed a summary judgment motion. (ECF No. 225.)
On January 3, 2014, plaintiff filed a motion to stay this action pending resolution of his
appeal of the November 6, 2013 order. (ECF No. 226.) On January 28, 2014, plaintiff filed a
motion requesting a certificate of appealability for his appeal. (ECF No. 232.) On March 25,
2014, the undersigned recommended that plaintiff’s motion for a certificate of appealability be
denied. (ECF No. 236.)
On March 25, 2014, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed plaintiff’s appeal on the
grounds that counsel failed to perfect the appeal as prescribed by the Federal Rules of Appellate
Procedure. (ECF No. 237.) Thus, the motion to stay this action pending resolution of the appeal
is moot because the Ninth Circuit dismissed plaintiff’s appeal.1
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that plaintiff’s motion to stay this action
(ECF No. 226) be denied.
These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge
assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days
after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written
objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned
“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the
objections shall be filed and served within fourteen days after service of the objections. The
parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to
appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).
Dated: April 1, 2014
Following adoption of these findings and recommendations, the court will set a briefing
schedule for defendant Osman’s summary judgment motion.
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?