Espinosa-Cisneros v. Solis-Lopez

Filing 34

ORDER that counsel be prepared to discuss the topics enumerated in this order at the telephonic status conference set for April 7, 2016. FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court must provide certified interpreters for the evidentiary hearing currently set for April 21, 2016. Signed by Magistrate Judge Carl W. Hoffman on 4/4/16. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF: cc C. Sanchez - MMM)

Download PDF
1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 LUIS RAUL ESPINOSA CISNEROS, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) vs. ) ) ) MARIANELA SOLIS LOPEZ, ) ) Respondent. ) __________________________________________) Case No. 2:16-cv-00057-GMN-CWH ORDER The Court is in the process of exploring the options for accommodating the presentation of 12 testimony by video and/or telephone at the evidentiary hearing currently set for April 21, 2016. 13 Additionally, the Court is in the process of coordinating interpreters for the parties. To facilitate 14 these processes, the Court requests that to the extent possible, counsel be prepared to discuss the 15 following topics at the telephonic status conference set for April 7, 2016: 16 • The location where Petitioner will provide testimony; 17 • The number of anticipated witnesses and the locations where they will provide 18 19 testimony; • 20 21 22 The proximity of a United States Embassy or Consulate to Petitioner and any witnesses who are located in Mexico; and • Petitioner and/or the witnesses’ ability to travel to a federal courthouse located near the United States-Mexico border. 23 IT IS SO ORDERED. 24 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court must provide certified interpreters for 25 26 the evidentiary hearing currently set for April 21, 2016. DATED: April 4, 2016. 27 28 ______________________________________ C.W. Hoffman, Jr. United States Magistrate Judge

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?