United States District Court, E.D. California
FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS
ALLISON CLAIRE, Magistrate Judge.
On June 18, 2014, the Court held a status conference in this matter. Alberto Gonzalez appeared for the California High Patrol and Officers Mangham, Walling and Pint. Floyd Cranmore appeared for defendants Mike's Towing Service, Inc., and Michael D. Olivarez. Plaintiff pro se Terrylyn McCain did not make an appearance for the reason that she is currently in custody for violation of a condition of release in a pending criminal matter before the Honorable Troy L. Nunley, USA v. McCain, 2:12-cr-0144-TLN.
This civil case has been stalled for over a year due to plaintiff's failure to participate in discovery. Plaintiff's ongoing criminal case, which has involved mental competency proceedings and changes in her custodial status, has complicated scheduling. The undersigned had hoped to address matters raised in the defendant's status report, ECF No. 175, and to issue a scheduling order. Once again, the status of plaintiff's criminal case has made scheduling impractical.
A jury trial was scheduled in the criminal matter for June 30, 2014. Plaintiff had previously waived her right to counsel in that case and is proceeding pro se. However, following a status conference on June 19, 2014, and based on Ms. McCain's filings in that case and on her conduct during the conference, Judge Nunley declared a doubt regarding her competency and vacated the trial date. USA v. McCain, ECF No. 140. On June 24, 2014, Judge Nunley ordered Ms. McCain to be committed for a mental competency examination and set a further status conference for August 7, 2014 at 9:30 a.m. to address the results of that examination. In light of foregoing, the undersigned will recommend that this matter be stayed pending Judge Nunley's ruling on plaintiff's competency to proceed in the criminal matter and the further scheduling, if any, of that case.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that:
1. This action be stayed pending Judge Nunley's ruling on plaintiff's competency; and
2. Plaintiff be directed to notify the Court within seven (7) days of Judge Nunley's ruling on her competency to proceed in the criminal matter.
These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the ...