Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_19-cv-02122/USCOURTS-casd-3_19-cv-02122-4/pdf.json

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

---

5 

19cv2122-MMA-WVG

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WILLIAM DAWES,

Plaintiff,

vs. 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF 

CALIFORNIA, et al.

Defendants.

Case No. 19cv2122-MMA-WVG

ORDER GRANTING JOINT 

MOTION TO STAY PROCEEDINGS

[Doc. No. 44]

Plaintiff William Dawes, a California inmate proceeding pro se, brings this civil 

rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Defendants Bravo, Gene, Ugalde, 

Ausbury, Silva, Shellano, Ayala, Solis, and Zuniga. See Doc. No. 13. The parties jointly 

move to stay these proceedings for a period of four (4) months pending the outcome of 

related criminal proceedings in state court. See Doc. No. 44; see also S.D. Sup. Ct. No.

SCS287189. The parties further request that the Court schedule a status conference, 

presumably to be held just prior to the expiration of the stay, for the purpose of updating 

the Court regarding the status of the related criminal proceedings and to determine

“whether it is in the best interests of the parties to lift the stay or proceed with discovery.” 

See Doc. No. 44 at 5. For the reasons set forth below, the Court GRANTS the joint 

motion to stay this action. 

Case 3:19-cv-02122-MMA-VET Document 46 Filed 04/19/21 PageID.<pageID>

Page 1 of 3
5 

19cv2122-MMA-WVG

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

DISCUSSION

A court’s “power to stay proceedings is incidental to the power inherent in every 

court to control the disposition of the causes on its docket with economy of time and 

effort for itself, for counsel, and for litigants.” Landis v. N. Am. Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254 

(1936). The Ninth Circuit has instructed:

The decision whether to stay civil proceedings in the face of a parallel criminal 

proceeding should be made “in light of the particular circumstances and 

competing interests involved in the case.” Molinaro, 889 F.2d at 902. This 

means the decisionmaker should consider “the extent to which the defendant’s 

fifth amendment rights are implicated.” Id. In addition, the decisionmaker 

should generally consider the following factors: (1) the interest of the 

plaintiffs in proceeding expeditiously with this litigation or any particular 

aspect of it, and the potential prejudice to plaintiffs of a delay; (2) the burden 

which any particular aspect of the proceedings may impose on defendants; (3) 

the convenience of the court in the management of its cases, and the efficient 

use of judicial resources; (4) the interests of persons not parties to the civil 

litigation; and (5) the interest of the public in the pending civil and criminal 

litigation. Id. at 903. 

Keating v. Office of Thrift Supervision, 45 F.3d 322, 324-25 (9th Cir. 1995) (quoting and 

citing Federal Sav. & Loan Ins. Corp. v. Molinaro, 889 F.2d 899 (9th Cir. 1989)). 

Upon due consideration of the Keating factors set forth above, the Court finds that 

a temporary stay of this action is appropriate in light of the criminal proceedings pending 

against Plaintiff in state court. Neither Plaintiff, Defendant, nor any interested third 

parties will suffer prejudice as a result of a temporary stay of the proceedings in this 

Court. As the parties note, proceedings related to Plaintiff’s criminal charges may impact 

certain claims and issues in this action. Moreover, Plaintiff’s current inability to access

his legal materials and the logistical difficulties highlighted by the parties with respect to 

litigating this case render a temporary stay appropriate. 

CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing, the Court STAYS this action for a period of four (4) 

months as jointly requested by the parties as of the date this Order is filed. 

Case 3:19-cv-02122-MMA-VET Document 46 Filed 04/19/21 PageID.<pageID>

Page 2 of 3
5 

19cv2122-MMA-WVG

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

The Court ORDERS Defendants to submit a status report no later than five (5) 

court days prior to the expiration of the stay advising the Court regarding the related

criminal proceedings and indicating whether circumstances warrant a further stay of these

proceedings. After consideration of the report, the Court will decide whether to lift the 

stay. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: April 19, 2021 __________________________________

HON. MICHAEL M. ANELLO

United States District Judge

Case 3:19-cv-02122-MMA-VET Document 46 Filed 04/19/21 PageID.<pageID>

Page 3 of 3