Tran v. Young et al

Filing 41

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 06/27/19 RECOMMENDING that plaintiff's motion for stay 40 be denied. Motion to Stay 40 referred to Judge Morrison C. England Jr. Objections due within 14 days. (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

BINH C. TRAN,

12
13
14
15

No. 2:17-cv-1260 MCE DB P
Plaintiff,

v.

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

K. YOUNG, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a civil rights

18

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff claims defendants violated his rights when they

19

failed to protect him, falsified documents and failed to call a requested witness during a

20

disciplinary hearing, and treated him differently than other inmates. Presently before the court is

21

plaintiff’s motion requesting a temporary stay. (ECF No. 40.)

22

Plaintiff states that on June 12, 2019 he was transferred to a different prison without

23

warning. He further states that he was directed to leave without being afforded the opportunity to

24

pack the property in his cell. Plaintiff alleges he does not have access to his supporting

25

documents at this time and he would be vulnerable to defendants’ motions.

26

The United States Supreme Court has clearly indicated that “the power to stay

27

proceedings is incidental to the power inherent in every court to control the disposition of the

28

causes on its docket with economy of time and effort for itself, for counsel, and for litigants.
1

1

How this can best be done calls for the exercise of judgment, which must weigh competing

2

interests and maintain an even balance.” Landis v. North American Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254-55

3

(1936). In this regard, “the proponent of the stay bears the burden of establishing its need.”

4

Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681, 706 (1997).

5

Pursuant to the court’s June 13, 2019 order, the parties have until October 4, 2019 to

6

conduct discovery. (ECF No. 38.) There are no pending motions for plaintiff to defend at this

7

time. Accordingly, the court does not find that a stay is required at this time. However, plaintiff

8

may request an extension of time should the delay in receiving his property affect his ability to

9

conduct discovery or oppose any motions filed by defendants.

10
11
12

For the reasons set forth above, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that plaintiff’s motion
for stay (ECF No. 40) be denied.
These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge

13

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within fourteen days

14

after being served with a copy of these findings and recommendations, any party may file written

15

objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. The document should be captioned

16

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the

17

objections shall be filed and served within seven days after service of the objections. The parties

18

are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may result in waiver of the

19

right to appeal the district court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 1991).

20

Dated: June 27, 2019

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2

1
2

DLB:12
DLB:1/Orders/Prisoner.Civil.Rights/tran1260.stay

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3