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.

Robert Elliot v. S. Readdy

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


December 19, 2012

ROBERT ELLIOT, PLAINTIFF,
v.
S. READDY, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kendall J. Newman United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER

Plaintiff's newly appointed counsel, Mr. E. Jacob Lubarsky, has timely filed a status report responsive to this court's order filed November 29, 2012. Counsel states that he had an initial conference with plaintiff, pursuant to which they decided to proceed on plaintiff's First Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 58). In addition, pursuant to the court's inquiry, plaintiff's counsel requests that the current stay in this action be extended for an additional 21 days, to "allow counsel to get further acquainted with the case file and records obtained to date and to develop a further litigation and discovery strategy in conjunction with Plaintiff." (Dkt. No. 68 at 2.)

For good cause shown, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The stay in this action is extended to January 18, 2013.

2. Defendants may file their pleadings and/or motions responsive to the First Amended Complaint no earlier than January 18, 2013, and no later than February 8, 2013.

3. Plaintiff shall respond to any motion filed by defendants, and defendants shall file any reply, pursuant to the deadlines set forth in Local Rule 230(l).

4. In order to consolidate the court's consideration of the several motions that may be filed in this action, all matters requiring hearing shall be scheduled on the undersigned's law and motion calendar for Thursday, March 21, 2013, at 10:00 a.m., in Courtroom No. 25.

5. The motion to dismiss previously filed by Doctor's Medical Center of Modesto and Doctors Hospital of Manteca (Dkt. No. 60), is denied without prejudice to its timely refiling.

6. Plaintiff's inquiry concerning appointment of new counsel (Dkt. No. 69), filed before his meeting with Mr. Lubarsky, is denied as moot.

SO ORDERED.

20121219

© 1992-2012 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.