Gress v. Smith, et al.

Filing 169

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 10/01/18 DENYING 168 motion for status conference. Within 7 days, plaintiff shall rectify the missing signatures on plaintiff's declarations. (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

MICHAEL GRESS,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 2:13-cv-0328 TLN KJN P

v.

ORDER

DR. CHRISTOPHER SMITH, et al. ,

15

Defendants.

16
Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding through counsel, with this civil rights action filed

17
18

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed a request for a status conference under Local Rule

19

240(a), which states, in pertinent part:

20

After an action has been filed, the assigned Judge or Magistrate
Judge shall order the holding of one or more status conferences for
the purpose of entering a pretrial scheduling order, and further status
conferences may be held at any time thereafter, with or without the
request of any party. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 16. . . . Such subjects may
include:

21
22
23

. . . (7) the disposition of pending motions, . . . (11) further
proceedings, including setting dates for further conferences, for the
completion of motions and discovery and for pretrial and trial; . . .
(18) any other matters that may facilitate the just, speedy and
inexpensive determination of the action.

24
25
26
27

E.D. L.R. 240(a).

28

////
1

1

In this case, discovery and scheduling orders have already issued. (See, e.g., ECF Nos.

2

58, 59.) Discovery is closed. The defendants filed motions for summary judgment, and their

3

reply was filed on July 7, 2017. The deadline for filing a sur-reply expired on April 13, 2018.

4

Defendants’ motions are fully briefed and submitted for decision.

5

Therefore, a status conference will not facilitate the court in ruling on the twelve

6

defendants’ pending motions, but rather usurp limited judicial resources. It is premature to set

7

dates for pretrial and trial because the outcome of these dispositive motions has not yet been

8

determined. Once the undersigned issues findings and recommendations, and the district court

9

addresses them, a further scheduling order will issue, as appropriate.

10

In addition, plaintiff’s declarations filed in support of his opposition are not signed by

11

plaintiff as required under Rule 11(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (ECF Nos. 132-3

12

and 133.) It may be that plaintiff’s counsel retained the signed original declarations. Local Rule

13

131(f). If so, counsel need only file a replacement signature page with the appropriate /s/ and

14

plaintiff’s name as required. Id. If not, counsel is granted seven days in which to re-submit

15

declarations bearing plaintiff’s signature.

16

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

17

1. Plaintiff’s motion for status conference (ECF No. 168) is denied; and

18

2. Within seven days, plaintiff shall rectify the missing signatures on plaintiff’s

19

declarations.

20

Dated: October 1, 2018

21
22
/cw/gres0328.240

23
24
25
26
27
28
2