Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-02090/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-02090-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

 The court notes that the parties previously submitted a joint status report on April 3,

2006, before the case was reassigned to the undersigned. 

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CAROLYN CARLTON BROCKMEIER, 

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-05-2090 MCE EFB PS

vs.

SOLANO COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPT.

et al,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

This case, in which plaintiff is proceeding pro se, was referred to this court pursuant to

Local Rule 72-302(c)(21), pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The case was reassigned to the

undersigned on August 29, 2006. Due to the reassignment of the case, and subsequent rulings on

defendants’ motion to dismiss, the court finds that a status conference is appropriate to facilitate

issuance of a pre-trial scheduling order.1

 Pursuant to Local Rule 16-240, IT IS HEREBY

ORDERED that:

1. A Status Conference is set for January 24, 2007, at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 25 before

the undersigned.

////

Case 2:05-cv-02090-MCE -KJN Document 26 Filed 01/10/07 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

2. The parties shall submit, five days before the scheduled hearing, a joint status report

addressing the following matters:

a. Anticipated motions and the scheduling thereof;

b. Anticipated discovery and the scheduling thereof;

c. Future proceedings, including setting appropriate cutoff dates for discovery

and law and motion and the scheduling of a pretrial conference and trial (including estimated

time of trial); 

d. Anticipated dates for disclosure of expert witnesses; 

e. Modification of standard pretrial procedures specified by the rules due to the

relative simplicity or complexity of the action or proceedings;

f. Whether this matter is to be tried before this court or the district court. See 28

U.S.C. § 636(c);

 g. Whether the counsel will stipulate to the trial judge acting as settlement judge

and waiving any disqualifications by virtue of his so acting, or whether they prefer to have a

settlement conference before another judge; and

 h. Any other matters that may add to the just and expeditious disposition of this

matter.

3. The parties are reminded of their continuing duty to notify chambers immediately of

any settlement or other disposition. See Local Rule 16-160. 

DATED: January 10, 2006.

Case 2:05-cv-02090-MCE -KJN Document 26 Filed 01/10/07 Page 2 of 2