Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-02217/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-02217-3/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

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARVIN GILLAM & PAMALA 

GILLAM,

Plaintiffs,

v.

CITY OF VALLEJO, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:14-cv-2217-KJM-KJN PS 

ORDER

On May 22, 2015, plaintiffs filed a motion to amend their complaint. (ECF No. 17.) 

However, in accordance with the court’s prior order, any formal discovery and motion practice in 

this case remain stayed until a scheduling order or other appropriate order issues. (ECF No. 16.) 

No such order has issued. Therefore, the court denies plaintiffs’ motion at this juncture, but 

without prejudice. 

The parties are due to file a joint status report regarding the status of plaintiffs’ efforts to 

obtain counsel and proposed dates for scheduling the case on June 1, 2015. (ECF No. 16.) As 

part of that status report, the parties shall also propose an appropriate deadline for filing motions 

to amend the pleadings. Additionally, plaintiffs are reminded that, once the temporary stay on 

motion practice is lifted by court order, they should first attempt to seek a stipulation from 

defendants to file an amended complaint before filing a motion for such relief with the court. 

Case 2:14-cv-02217-KJM-KJN Document 18 Filed 05/28/15 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

Any such motion shall be accompanied by a declaration from plaintiffs, under penalty of perjury, 

indicating that they first sought a stipulation to amend the complaint from defendants, but were 

unsuccessful. Importantly, the declaration shall also outline the parties’ efforts to meaningfully 

meet and confer regarding such a proposed amendment. Furthermore, any motion shall be 

properly noticed for hearing pursuant to Local Rule 230. Failure to comply with these 

requirements may result in a summary denial of such motion. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs’ motion to amend (ECF No. 17) 

is denied without prejudice.

Dated: May 28, 2015

Case 2:14-cv-02217-KJM-KJN Document 18 Filed 05/28/15 Page 2 of 2