Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-00554/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-00554-20/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 

27 

28 

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

LEON JEROME MARTIN, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

CITY OF VALLEJO, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:14-cv-0554 AC PS 

ORDER 

 This matter is set for a Final Pretrial Conference before the undersigned on August 17, 

2016 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom No. 26.1 (ECF No. 108.) On April 3, 2015, the court issued an 

Amended Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Order that advised the parties that, “[p]laintiff and 

defendants shall file separate Pretrial Statements in accordance with the provisions of Local Rule 

281(a)(1),” and that “in addition to their separate Pretrial Statements, the parties shall cooperate 

in the preparation of a JOINT STATEMENT with respect to the undisputed facts and disputed 

factual issues of the case,” which shall “be filed with the court concurrently with the filing of 

plaintiff’s separate Pretrial Statement.” (ECF No. 52 at 4.) Local Rule 281(a)(1) provides that 

plaintiff’s separate Pretrial Statement, and thus the parties’ joint Pretrial Statement, must be filed 

“[n]ot less than fourteen (14) days before the date set by the Court for the holding of the final 

 

1

 The parties have consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. ' 636(c)(1). ECF No. 21. 

Case 2:14-cv-00554-AC Document 112 Filed 08/04/16 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 

27 

28 

2

pretrial conference . . . .” There are now fewer than fourteen days before the Final Pretrial 

Conference, and no pretrial statements have been filed. 

 To the extent the failure to timely file the pretrial statements is the result of plaintiff 

proceeding pro se, the court is cognizant of the challenges faced by pro se litigants. That, 

however, does not excuse compliance with orders of this court or the court’s Local Rules. 

Similarly, defendants may not rely on plaintiff’s failure to comply to excuse their own noncompliance. The parties are advised that, going forward, the failure to comply with an order of 

this court or the Local Rules MAY RESULT IN THE IMPOSITION OF SANCTIONS, which 

may include monetary sanctions, orders precluding proof, the elimination of claims or defenses, 

or such other sanctions as the court deems appropriate. 

 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 

 1. On or before August 10, 2016, plaintiff shall file a separate Pretrial Statement; 

 2. On or before August 10, 2016, defendants shall file a separate Pretrial Statement; and 

 3. On or before August 10, 2016 the parties shall file a joint Pretrial Statement. 

DATED: August 4, 2016 

Case 2:14-cv-00554-AC Document 112 Filed 08/04/16 Page 2 of 2