Chaker v. Fazal et al

Filing 54

ORDER on Ex Parte Motion for Appointment of Counsel and Motion to Stay Proceedings [Doc. No. 53 ]. Signed by Judge Cathy Ann Bencivengo on 8/1/2017. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(jjg)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 10 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA DARREN CHAKER, Case No.: 3:16-cv-1872-CAB-(BLM) Plaintiff, 11 12 v. 13 ORDER ON EX PARTE MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL AND MOTION TO STAY PROCEEDINGS [Doc. No. 53] LEESA FAZAL, et al., 14 Defendants. 15 16 This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s third ex-parte application for 17 appointment of counsel, or in the alternative, motion to staying the proceedings [Doc. No. 18 53.] For the reasons discussed below, the motion is DENIED. 19 Motion to Stay Proceedings 20 On July 22, 2016, Plaintiff filed suit alleging multiple violations of his constitutional 21 rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. [Doc. No. 1.] On April 25, 2017, after granting Plaintiff 22 multiple extensions to effectuate service upon Defendants, the Court issued an Order of 23 Dismissal for failure to prosecute. [Doc. No. 33.] On May 15, 2017, the Court granted 24 Plaintiff’s ex parte motion to reinstate the case. [Doc. No. 37.] On July 28, 2017, Plaintiff 25 filed the current motion. [Doc. No. 53] 26 Courts have inherent power to manage their dockets and stay proceedings. See 27 Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681, 706(1997); Landis v. North Am. Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254 28 (1936) (district court has inherent power to manage its docket and courtroom with a view 1 3:16-cv-1872-CAB-(BLM) 1 toward the efficient and expedient resolution of cases). Factors to consider when deciding 2 to stay a proceeding include: (1) the possible damage which may result from granting a 3 stay, (2) the hardship a party may suffer if the case is allowed to go forward, and (3) “the 4 orderly course of justice measured in terms of the simplifying or complicating of issues, 5 proof, and questions of law which could be expected to result from a stay.” Lockyer v. 6 Mirant Corp., 398 F.3d 1098, 1110 (9th Cir. 2005). 7 The Motion asserts that this matter should be stayed and counsel appointed otherwise 8 the Court would be “discard[ing] the rights of a seriously ill person who was thrusted into 9 jail twice and vindicated on both occasions for alleged defamation and drug use, by 10 disallowing him the opportunity to oppose dismissal.” [Doc No. 53 at 1.] Aside from his 11 health issues, Plaintiff provides no other argument in support of his motion to stay the 12 proceedings. 13 At this early stage in the litigation the Court sees no benefit in granting the stay. 14 Previously, the Court extended the deadline for Plaintiff to serve Defendants and also 15 increased the time Plaintiff had to respond to the motions to dismiss. As a result of 16 Plaintiff’s non-opposition, the Court granted Defendants’ motions to dismiss with leave to 17 amend. [Doc. No. 50.] Any undue harm and irreparable injury that Plaintiff claims will 18 result from the non-issuance of a stay has already been avoided by the Court dismissing 19 the current action without prejudice and by giving him, up to and including August 17, 20 2017, to file an amended complaint. Furthermore, staying these proceedings would not 21 result in the efficient and expedient resolution of this case. In fact, if the Court were to 22 issue an indefinite stay the opposite could occur. Accordingly, the Court DENIES 23 Plaintiffs application to stay these proceedings. 24 Motion for appointment of counsel 25 For the same reasons the Court articulated in its earlier orders [Doc. Nos. 15, 20], 26 the renewed motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED without prejudice. 27 Order 28 The Court hereby ORDERS as follows: 2 3:16-cv-1872-CAB-(BLM) 1 2 1. The petition to appoint counsel for Darren Chaker is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 3 2. The Motion to Stay these proceedings is DENIED. 4 3. If Plaintiff does not file an amended complaint, by the August 17, 2017 deadline, 5 6 7 the Clerk of the Court shall CLOSE the case. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: August 1, 2017 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 3:16-cv-1872-CAB-(BLM)

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?