IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
May 15, 2012
KARLUK M. MAYWEATHERS, PLAINTIFF,
GARY SWARTHOUT, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kendall J. Newman United States Magistrate Judge
Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel and in forma pauperis, with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On April 19, 2012, plaintiff filed a motion for appointment of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). (Dkt. No. 51.) The court found that appointment of counsel was warranted and, on April 27, 2012, granted plaintiff's motion. (Dkt. No. 52.) Amir Nassihi has been selected from the court's pro bono attorney panel to represent plaintiff and he has agreed to be appointed.
In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Amir Nassihi is appointed as counsel in the above-entitled matter.
2. Amir Nassihi shall notify Sujean Park, at (916) 930-4278, or via email at firstname.lastname@example.org, if he has any questions related to the appointment.
3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this order upon Amir Nassihi, Shook Hardy & Bacon, LLP, One Montgomery Tower, Suite 2700, San Francisco, California 94104.
4. The Clerk of Court is also directed to serve a copy of this order on plaintiff at his current address of record.
5. Counsel for the parties are directed to file, within forty-five days after service of this order, a joint status report that provides the following:
a. A statement whether this action is ready to proceed to trial. The parties shall each address whether there is any reason that the court should not presently set new pretrial and trial dates, and related deadlines.*fn1 The parties shall identify the anticipated length of trial, and also identify any dates, within the next year, when they may be unavailable for trial or a trial confirmation hearing in this court.
b. A statement whether it may be helpful to convene a further settlement conference. Plaintiff participated without counsel in a settlement conference on October 20, 2011, before Magistrate Judge Kellison. Should the parties, in consultation with counsel, believe that a further settlement conference may be helpful, they shall so inform the court and indicate whether the parties consent to convening such conference before Magistrate Judge Kellison and/or the undersigned magistrate judge.