Cleveland v. Curry et al

Filing 135

ORDER requiring briefing. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nandor J. Vadas on June 26, 2013. (njvlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/26/2013)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6

EUREKA DIVISION

7
8

IVAN VERNORD CLEVELAND, et al.,

Case No. 07-cv-02809-NJV

Plaintiffs,
9
v.
10
11

BEN CURRY, et al.,

United States District Court
Northern District of California

Defendants.

ORDERING REQUIRING BRIEFING
ADDRESSING WHETHER CASE NO.
12-5222 SBA SHOULD BE RELATED
TO THIS CASE

12
13
14

Plaintiff Cleveland has filed a pro se petition for habeas corpus. See Cleveland v.

15

Grounds, Case No. 12-5222 SBA (“5222”). In this petition, Cleveland alleges that he was

16

sexually assaulted by a peace officer while incarcerated at CTF Central, that he was refused proper

17

medical treatment by prison officials, and that his due process rights were violated. Some of the

18

allegations in 5222 appear similar to those Plaintiff alleges in Cleveland v. Curry, Case No. 07-

19

2809 NJV (“2809”). On June 17, 2013, the district court accordingly referred 5222 to the

20

undersigned to determine whether it was related to 2809. See Doc. No. 131. Neither party in

21

either action responded to the district court’s order.

22

//

23

//

24

//

25

//

26

//

27

//

28

//

The Court orders the parties in 2809 to file letter briefs, not to exceed 3 pages, arguing why

1
2

5222 should or should not be related to 2809. If the parties argue the cases should related, they

3

also should offer their preferred solution(s) for dealing with the varying procedural posture of each

4

case.1 The briefs shall be filed no later than 7 days from the date of this order.

5
6
IT IS SO ORDERED.

7
8
9

Dated: June 26, 2013
______________________________________
NANDOR J. VADAS
United States Magistrate Judge

10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

22
23
24
25
26
1

27
28

The defendants in 2809 have filed a (renewed) motion for summary judgment, to be heard on
August 1, 2013. Doc. No. 132. If summary judgment is denied, the case will proceed to trial on
November 4, 2013. The claims in 5222 have not been screened, and no defendant has been
served, much less appeared in the action.
2