Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-02441/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-02441-10/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROBERT HECKER, et al.,

Plaintiffs, No. 2:05-cv-2441 LKK JFM P

vs.

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF

CORRECTIONS AND

REHABILITATION, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiffs are state prisoners proceeding through counsel with a proposed class

action raising claims under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the Americans with Disabilities Act

of 1990, and California Government Code § 11135. This action is proceeding on plaintiffs’

second amended complaint, filed October 20, 2006. The action was stayed by order filed March

15, 2007, and is now set for hearing before the undersigned on April 19, 2013 on plaintiffs’

March 1, 2013 renewed motion to lift the stay.

Plaintiffs previously filed a motion to lift the stay of this action on September 19,

2012. By order filed October 19, 2012 (ECF No. 102), plaintiffs’ motion was denied without

prejudice to its renewal, as appropriate, not later than March 1, 2013. During the intervening

period, the parties were directed to 

1

Case 2:05-cv-02441-KJM-DAD Document 107 Filed 04/12/13 Page 1 of 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

meet and confer, under the guidance of the Coleman special master

to: (1) identify which, if any, issues raised in the second amended

complaint have been resolved through the Coleman remedial

process; (2) identify which, if any, issues raised in the second

amended complaint remain in dispute; (3) as to any remaining

issues so identified, which of those are or could be resolved in the

Coleman remedial process; and (4) which, if any, of the claims

raised in the second amended complaint cannot be resolved

through the Coleman remedial process and why they cannot be so

resolved.

Order filed October 19, 2012 (ECF No. 102) at 3. The October 19, 2012 order further provided

that any renewed motion to lift the stay “must be accompanied by a joint report by the parties and

approved by the Coleman special master addressing the four topics” outlined in the order. Id.

On March 1, 2013, plaintiffs renewed their motion to lift the stay. In relevant

part, that motion is accompanied by a joint status report in which plaintiffs represent that on

January 7, 2013, defendants filed a motion to terminate the Coleman action and, following that

filing, the parties and the Coleman Special Master agreed that no further meetings would be

productive at that time. (Joint Status Report filed March 1, 2013 (ECF No. 103-1) at 2-3.) In

their opposition to plaintiffs’ motion, filed April 4, 2013, defendants contend, inter alia, that the

motion to lift the stay is premature while Coleman remains pending. (See Defendants’

Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Renewed Motion for Relief from Stay filed April 4, 2013 (ECF No.

106) at 9.) On April 5, 2013, the district court denied defendants’ motion to terminate Coleman. 

(See Order filed April 5, 2013 in Coleman v. Brown, No. 2:90-cv-0520 LKK JFM P (ECF No.

4539).) 

After review of the record, and good cause appearing, the court will direct the

parties to resume the meet and confer process required by the court’s October 19, 2012 order. 

The parties will be granted an additional period of four months to complete that process. Finally,

plaintiffs’ motion to lift the stay will again be denied without prejudice. 

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

/////

2

Case 2:05-cv-02441-KJM-DAD Document 107 Filed 04/12/13 Page 2 of 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

1. The parties shall resume the meet and confer process required by the court’s

October 19, 2012 order (ECF No. 102);

2. The meet and confer process required by this order shall be completed by

August 16, 2013. 

3. Plaintiffs’ March 1, 2013 motion for relief from stay (ECF No. 103) is denied

without prejudice to its renewal, as appropriate, not later than September 5, 2013. Any renewed

motion must be accompanied by a joint report by the parties and approved by the Coleman

special master addressing the four topics outlined above and in the court’s October 19, 2012

order. 

4. The hearing set for April 19, 2013 before the undersigned is dropped from

calendar. 

5. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this order on Matthew A.

Lopes, Jr., Esq., Pannone Lopes & Devereaux LLC, 317 Iron Horse Way, Suite 301, Providence,

RI 02908.

DATED: April 11, 2013.

DAD:12

heck05cv2441.ls2

3

Case 2:05-cv-02441-KJM-DAD Document 107 Filed 04/12/13 Page 3 of 3