Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-02634/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-02634-3/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

TROY MAGARRELL,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-2634 LKK DAD P

vs.

P. MANGIS, M.D., et al., ORDER REQUIRING

Defendants. STATUS REPORT

 /

On February 2, 2006, plaintiff’s counsel filed a declaration, stating that he would

like to file an amended complaint. However, defendant Roche had filed an answer to plaintiff’s

pro se complaint on December 7, 2005. Accordingly, on August 14, 2006, the court granted

plaintiff thirty days to file a motion for leave to amend, together with a proposed amended

complaint, and informed plaintiff’s counsel that he was required to notice the motion for hearing

before the undersigned on a regularly scheduled law and motion calendar. More than one year

lapsed. Plaintiff’s counsel did not file a motion or otherwise respond to the court’s order. On

October 31, 2007, plaintiff’s counsel filed a motion, requesting a scheduling order and informing

the court that plaintiff will not amend his complaint. 

/////

/////

Case 2:04-cv-02634-LKK-DAD Document 37 Filed 02/25/08 Page 1 of 3
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

Given the lengthy delays in this case, the court is unwilling to issue a scheduling

order until both parties submit and serve by mail on all other parties a status report. The status

report shall address:

1. The matter of the two unserved defendants, P. Mangis and Richard Sandham;

2. Whether this matter is ready for trial and, if not, why not;

3. Whether additional discovery is deemed necessary and, if so, the nature and

scope of the discovery and the time needed in which to complete it;

4. Whether a pretrial motion is contemplated and, if so, the type of motion and

the time needed to file the motion and complete the time schedule set forth in Local Rule 78-

230(m);

5. A narrative statement of the facts that will be offered by oral or documentary

evidence at trial;

6. A list of all exhibits to be offered into evidence at the trial of the case;

7. A list of the names and addresses of all witnesses the party intends to call;

8. A summary of the anticipated testimony of any incarcerated witnesses;

9. The time estimated for trial;

10. Whether either party still requests trial by jury; and

 11. Any other matter, not covered above, which the party desires to call to the

attention of the court.

The parties are informed that they may, if all consent, have this case tried by a

United States Magistrate Judge while preserving their right to appeal to the United States Court

of Appeals. An appropriate form for consent to trial by a magistrate judge is attached. Any party

choosing to consent may complete the form and return it to the clerk of this court. Neither the

magistrate judge nor the district judge handling the case will be notified of the filing of a consent

form unless all parties to the action have consented.

/////

Case 2:04-cv-02634-LKK-DAD Document 37 Filed 02/25/08 Page 2 of 3
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

3

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s October 31, 2007 motion for a scheduling order is denied as

premature.

2. Plaintiff’s status report shall be filed and served within thirty days from the

date of service of this order. Defendant’s status report shall be filed within thirty days thereafter. 

The parties are advised that failure to file a status report in accordance with this order may result

in the imposition of sanctions, including dismissal of the action or preclusion of issues or

witnesses.

3. The clerk of the court is directed to mail to all parties the form “Consent to

Proceed Before United States Magistrate Judge,” together with the instant order.

DATED: February 22, 2008.

DAD:9

maga2634.40

Case 2:04-cv-02634-LKK-DAD Document 37 Filed 02/25/08 Page 3 of 3