Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Richard D. Davis, Iii v. Folsom Cordova Unified School District

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


July 5, 2011

RICHARD D. DAVIS, III, PLAINTIFF,
v.
FOLSOM CORDOVA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

ORDER

Plaintiff commenced this fee-paid action on May 9, 2011, by filing a pro se complaint naming eight defendants. By order filed May 11, 2011, the case was set for a Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference before the undersigned on September 9, 2011, and plaintiff was ordered to serve a copy of the order setting status conference on each defendant within fourteen days and file a proof of such service within five days after service. The time for filing proof of such service expired more than a month ago, and plaintiff has failed to file any evidence that the order setting status conference was served on any defendant.

The record reflects that on June 3, 2011, plaintiff filed an amended complaint naming five additional defendants. In a motion to dismiss set for hearing on August 26, 2011, all thirteen defendants seek to dismiss the claims alleged in plaintiff's amended complaint and to strike portions of the pleading. If the action proceeds, defendants seek a more definite statement.

In light of the time required for the parties to brief the pending motion and for that motion to ultimately be ruled upon by the assigned district judge, it would be premature to hold a status conference two weeks after the hearing of defendants' motion. Accordingly, the status conference will be vacated at this time. If claims remain after the district judge rules on defendants' motion, the status conference will be re-set.

Plaintiff is cautioned that "[a]ny individual representing himself or herself without an attorney is bound by the Federal Rules of Civil or Criminal Procedure, these [Local] Rules, and all other applicable law." Local Rule 183(a). All obligations imposed on "counsel" by the Local Rules apply to persons who are proceeding pro se, and failure to comply with rules and court orders may be ground for dismissal, judgment by default, or any other appropriate sanction.

Good cause appearing, IT IS ORDERED that the Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference set in this case for September 9, 2011, is vacated.

20110705

© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.