Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-02085/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-02085-0/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

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BATES, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:14-cv-02085-LJO-SAB

ORDER STAYING ACTION

Plaintiffs filed this action on December 29, 2014 alleging deliberate indifference to 

conditions of confinement for being housed in an area where they contracted Valley Fever. This 

action was referred to the magistrate judge pursuant to Local Rule 302.

On July 7, 2015, this action was related to Smith v. Schwarzenegger, No. 1:14-cv-00060-

SAB. This action appears to meet the requirements for consolidation with Smith.

On January 16, 2015, this Court held an informal conference with the parties in Smith

and found that consolidating further cases into the action at this time would further delay the 

action. “The District Court has broad discretion to stay proceedings as an incident to its power to 

control its own docket.” Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681, 706 (1997). This “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). Here, staying the action to permit the motion 

Case 1:14-cv-02085-LJO-SAB Document 11 Filed 01/22/15 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

to dismiss in Smith to be decided will not dispose of any claims or defenses or deny Plaintiffs 

any relief sought. S.E.C. v. CMKM Diamonds, Inc., 729 F.3d 1248, 1260 (9th Cir. 2013) (A

magistrate judge has the authority to issue a stay where the stay does not dispose of any claims or 

defenses or deny the party any ultimate relief sought). The parties are advised that the stay of 

this action does not affect the inmate’s right to obtain his prison records. 

For the reasons stated in the order issued in Smith v. Schwarzenegger, No. 1:14-cv00060-SAB, this Court exercises its discretion to stay this action pending resolution of the 

motion to dismiss in Smith. Id. at ECF No. . Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this 

action is STAYED until further order of the Court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 22, 2015 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-02085-LJO-SAB Document 11 Filed 01/22/15 Page 2 of 2