Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00102/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00102-18/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAVON D. DENNIS,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-05-0102 FCD EFB P

vs.

C. HUSKEY, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is a prisoner, without counsel, suing for alleged civil rights violations. See 42

U.S.C. § 1983. Defendant, through counsel, has filed a motion to stay this action pursuant to

Landis v. North American Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254 (1936), and Rule 1of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure. Defendant asserts that because his motion for summary judgment is pending,

staying this action and vacating the pretrial and trial dates, enumerated below, would “secure the

just, speedy, and inexpensive determination” of this action. 

The court finds that Landis simply does not apply to the situation at hand. Landis

involved two lawsuits with different plaintiffs and the same defendants. The matters involved

the validity of a statute that was at issue in a third suit. Landis, 299 U.S. at 250-51. Here,

defendant merely seeks to vacate pretrial and trial dates pending resolution of the motion for 

summary judgment. If the court were to stay this action, it could not resolve the motion. 

Case 2:05-cv-00102-FCD-EFB Document 67 Filed 07/11/07 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

Nonetheless, the pretrial dates must be vacated. 

Pursuant to the November 16, 2006, schedule, plaintiff must file a pretrial statement and

any motions necessary to obtain attendance of witnesses at trial no later than July 27, 2007. 

Defendant must file a pretrial statement no later than August 3, 2007, and trial is scheduled for

August 17, 2007. However, as noted above, defendant’s April 10, 2007, motion for summary

judgment is pending. It appears that the parties cannot comply with the schedule even if they

exercise diligence. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b); see also, Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc.,

975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992) (good cause to modify a schedule exists when a party cannot

meet the deadline despite exercising due diligence).

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that:

1. Defendant’s July 6, 2007, motion is granted; and

2. The above dates are vacated. The court will make a pretrial and trial schedule upon

the resolution of defendant’s motion for summary judgment, if appropriate.

Dated: July 11, 2007.

Case 2:05-cv-00102-FCD-EFB Document 67 Filed 07/11/07 Page 2 of 2