Vail v. City of Sacramento

Filing 62

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 9/24/2019 DENYING without prejudice 61 Motion for Declarative Judgment, to renewal and the 9/27/2019 hearing is VACATED. (Reader, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

TERRENCE VAIL,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 2:16-cv-2673 JAM DB PS

v.

ORDER

CITY OF SACRAMENTO,

15

Defendant.

16
Plaintiff Terrence Vail is proceeding in this action pro se. This matter was referred to the

17
18

undersigned in accordance with Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On August 29,

19

2019, plaintiff filed a motion for declarative judgment. (ECF No. 61.) That motion is noticed for

20

hearing before the undersigned on September 27, 2019.
However, on August 1, 2019, the undersigned issued findings and recommendations,

21
22

recommending that the amended complaint’s claims arising under federal law be dismissed

23

without leave to amend, the court decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the amended

24

complaint’s state law claims, and that this action be closed. (ECF No. 56.) Those findings and

25

recommendations are pending before the assigned District Judge. Plaintiff’s motion, therefore,

26

will be denied pending resolution of the August 1, 2019 findings and recommendations.

27

////

28

////
1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s August 29, 2019 motion for

1
2

declarative judgment (ECF No. 61) is denied without prejudice to renewal and the September 27,

3

2019 hearing is vacated.1

4

Dated: September 24, 2019

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

DLB:6
DB/orders/orders.pro set/vail2673.den.moot.ord

24
25
26
27
28

1

In the event the August 1, 2019 findings and recommendations are not adopted in full, plaintiff
may re-notice the motion for declarative judgment for hearing before the undersigned.
2