Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-01726/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-01726-3/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

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DANNY CAESAR,

 Plaintiff,

 vs.

JEFFREY BEARD, et al.,

 Defendants.

1:13-cv-01726-LJO-GSA-PC

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S 

MOTION FOR STAY 

(Doc. 13.)

ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF 

TIME TO FILE OBJECTIONS TO 

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

(Doc. 12.)

DEADLINE JULY 1, 2015

ORDER FOR CLERK TO SERVE 

PLAINTIFF AT TWO ADDRESSES

I. BACKGROUND

Danny Caesar (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with this civil rights 

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed the Complaint commencing this action on 

October 28, 2013. (Doc. 1.) The court screened the Complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 and 

issued an order on March 17, 2014, dismissing the Complaint for failure to state a claim, with 

leave to amend. (Doc. 10.) On April 17, 2014, Plaintiff filed the First Amended Complaint. 

(Doc. 11.) On March 17, 2015, the court entered findings and recommendations, 

recommending that this case be dismissed, with prejudice, for failure to state a claim. (Doc. 

Case 1:13-cv-01726-DAD-BAM Document 14 Filed 03/30/15 Page 1 of 3
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

12.) Plaintiff was granted thirty days in which to file objections to the findings and 

recommendations. (Id.)

On March 25, 2015, Plaintiff filed a motion to stay the proceedings in this action, which 

is now before the court. (Doc. 13.) 

II. MOTION TO STAY

Plaintiff requests a stay of the proceedings in this action, pending the outcome of “a 

Proposition 36 Hearing at Santa Clara County Superior Court.” Motion, Doc. 13 at 1. Plaintiff 

does not indicate when the hearing is scheduled or how long it will last; however, he asserts

that he was unexpectedly returned to the Santa Clara court, without possession of his property. 

Plaintiff requests the court to “put my case on hold until such time that I contact [the court] and 

either ask [the court] to re-open the case or dismiss it altogether, depending on the outcome of 

my Proposition 36 Hearing.” Id.

The Court does not lightly stay litigation, due to the possibility of prejudice to 

defendants. While Plaintiff has shown good cause for a delay in the proceedings for this action, 

Plaintiff=s only remedy is not a stay. Plaintiff’s only pending deadline in this action is to file 

objections to the findings and recommendations of March 17, 2015 within thirty days. 

Therefore, Plaintiff shall be granted an extension of time until July 1, 2015 in which to file 

objections. Should Plaintiff require a further extension of time, he should file a motion before 

the current deadline expires.

III. CONCLUSION

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's motion to stay the proceedings in this action, filed on March 25, 2015, 

is DENIED;

2. Plaintiff is GRANTED an extension of time until July 1, 2015 to file objections 

to the findings and recommendations issued by the court on March 17, 2015; 

and

///

///

Case 1:13-cv-01726-DAD-BAM Document 14 Filed 03/30/15 Page 2 of 3
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

27

28

3. The Clerk of Court is directed to serve Plaintiff with a copy of this order at two 

addresses:

(1) Plaintiff’s address of record on the court’s CM-ECF case 

management system, and

(2) Danny Caesar

PFN #BZI551

885 N. San Pedro St.

San Jose, California 95110

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 30, 2015 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:13-cv-01726-DAD-BAM Document 14 Filed 03/30/15 Page 3 of 3