Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-03737/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-03737-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RANDY PANKEY,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

CITY OF CONCORD, ET AL.,

Defendant(s).

___________________________________/

Case No. C-06-3737 JCS

ORDER DENYING WITHOUT

PREJUDICE, DEFENDANTS MOTION

TO DISMISS COMPLAINT FOR

FAILURE TO EFFECT SERVICE [Docket

No. 16]; DENYING WITHOUT

PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF’S IFP

APPLICATION [Docket No. 13] AND

CASE MANAGEMENT AND

PRETRIAL ORDER

On September 28, 2006, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss Complaint for Failure to

Effect Service (the “Motion to Dismiss”)

On November 3, 2006, the Motion to Dismiss and an initial case management conference

came on for hearing. Randy Pankey, pro se, appeared. Mark Coon, counsel for Defendants,

appeared.

For reasons stated on the record, and good cause shown, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT

the Motion to Dismiss is DENIED without prejudice.

 IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED THAT:

1. Defendant’s opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion for Collateral Estoppel and Demand For

Damages (the “Motion”), shall be filed by November 10, 2006. There will be no reply brief. Upon

the filing of the opposition, the Motion shall be taken under submission.

2. Plaintiff’s In Forma Pauperis (IFP) Application, filed on September 21, 2006, is DENIED

without prejudice. Plaintiff shall re-file a completed IFP Application by November 10, 2006.

//

Case 3:06-cv-03737-JCS Document 42 Filed 11/07/06 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

Judge Zimmerman issued his Settlement Conference Order on Sept. 28,2006, setting the settlement

conference for Feb. 1, 2007 at 9:00 AM

2

3. All dates that were set by Judge Alsup are VACATED, except for the referral to

Magistrate Judge Bernard Zimmerman for a settlement conference.1

4. Defense counsel shall consult with his clients to determine whether he can accept service

of the summons and complaint in this matter on behalf of all Defendants.

5. An updated case management conference statement, with proposed dates, shall be filed by

December 1, 2006.

6. A further case management conference is set for December 8, 2006, at 1:30 p.m.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 6, 2006

___________________________

JOSEPH C. SPERO

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:06-cv-03737-JCS Document 42 Filed 11/07/06 Page 2 of 2