Ware v. McDonald et al

Filing 94

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 11/24/15 ordering that plaintiff's request 93 is denied without prejudice. (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

MARTIN WARE,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 2:12-cv-1505 TLN KJN P

v.

ORDER

M. McDONALD, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding pro se, with a civil rights action pursuant to 42

18

U.S.C. § 1983. On October 13, 2015, plaintiff filed a letter concerning his pretrial statement.

19

Plaintiff states that he is in the process of preparing his pretrial statement, but has had difficulty

20

attending the law library, and needs to file exhibits in excess of 50 pages. Plaintiff also claims his

21

family will be sending a money order to cover the cost of attendance of unincarcerated witnesses.
However, the court has not yet required the parties to file pretrial statements. Rather, on

22
23

October 7, 2015, the court issued a revised scheduling order which, inter alia, extended the

24

deadline for filing pretrial motions, not pretrial statements. It is unclear whether the parties

25

anticipate filing such dispositive motions, but all parties are allowed to file dispositive motions up

26

to and including January 18, 2016. The filing of a pretrial statement at this time would be

27

premature.

28

////
1

1

Similarly, plaintiff need not have his family send a money order for the attendance of

2

witnesses until he is instructed to do so by the court. In the pretrial order, the court will address

3

which witnesses are allowed to testify at trial and provide information about witness fees. In

4

addition, in the pretrial order, the court identifies the exhibits the parties expect to submit at trial,

5

but plaintiff is not required to submit exhibits with his pretrial statement, but merely identify

6

them.

7

Once any dispositive motion is resolved, or the dispositive motions deadline of January

8

18, 2016 has passed, the court will issue a further scheduling order providing deadlines for the

9

filing of pretrial statements.1

10

To the extent that plaintiff seeks an extension of time to file a pretrial statement, IT IS

11

HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s request (ECF No. 93) is denied without prejudice.

12

Dated: November 24, 2015

13
14
/ware 1505.inf

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

1

In his letter, plaintiff also discusses his plans to file other actions. It is unclear why plaintiff
included this information; the undersigned is not able to advise plaintiff on the filing of other
lawsuits. Moreover, the court is not inclined to entertain a motion to amend in this action, filed in
June of 2012.
2