Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Ortiz v. Reynolds

United States District Court, E.D. California

June 23, 2016

JOSE B. ORTIZ, Plaintiff,
v.
J. REYNOLDS, et al., Defendants.

          ORDER

          EDMUND F. BRENNAN, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He filed a motion seeking either an extension of time to file objections to the pretrial order or to continue the trial date, stating that he was transferred to a new prison in mid-January and had not yet received his legal property. ECF No. 129. The court directed defense counsel to inquire into the status of plaintiff's legal property, ECF No. 131, and counsel submitted a response on June 6, 2016, stating that plaintiff had not been given that property until June 1, 2016 due to it having been erroneously shipped to the wrong facility. ECF No. 133.

         Because plaintiff was deprived of his legal property until recently and was therefore unable to properly prepare for the upcoming trial, his motion to continue the trial date is granted. He is also granted an extension of time to object to the pretrial order.

         Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that:

         1. The jury trial set for August 1, 2016 is hereby VACATED and RESET for November 14, 2016, at 9 a.m. in Courtroom No. 7.

         2. Plaintiff shall have 21 days from the date of this order to file any objections to the Pretrial Order. The court will rule on any objections filed by plaintiff, as well as the objections filed by defendant (ECF No. 125) after that deadline has passed, except that:

a. Defendant's objection regarding the exhibits section of the pretrial order is moot in light of the May 17, 2016 Supplemental Pretrial Order (ECF No. 132) and is accordingly overruled; and
b. Defendant's objection regarding a proposed statement of the case is moot in light of the May 17, 2016 Supplemental Pretrial Order (ECF No. 132) and is accordingly overruled.

         3. The deadlines provided in the May 17, 2016 Supplemental Pretrial Order (ECF No. 132) are continued as follows:

a. The following deadlines, previously set for July 11, 2016, are continued to October 24, 2016:
i. If available to the parties, the parties are required to file electronically a request to the Courtroom Deputy Clerk, Stephanie Deutsch, by October 24, 2016, if they wish to reserve and arrange for orientation on the Court's mobile audio/visual equipment for presentation of evidence.
ii. Any evidentiary or procedural motions ("motions in limine") shall be filed by October 24, 2016.

         b. The following deadlines, previously set for July 18, 2016, are ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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