Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01022/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01022-55/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TROAS V. BARNETT,

Plaintiff,

v.

MARTIN GAMBOA, ANGEL DURAN,

and MANUEL TORRES,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:05-cv-01022-BAM (PC)

ORDER DENYINGPLAINTIFF’S MOTIONFOR

TRIAL SCHEDULE

(ECF No. 240.)

Plaintiff Troas V. Barnett (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action is proceeding against

Defendants Martin Gamboa, Angel Duran and Manuel Torres for the use of excessive force, and

against Defendant Torres for failure to intervene in violation of the Eighth Amendment. The matter

is currently set for trial on January 22, 2012. 

On January 2, 2013, Plaintiff filed the instant motion for a “trial schedule,” explaining that

he “cannot reasonably anticipate the duration and extent of time in which it will take for jury

selection voir dire and impanelment of the jury.” (ECF No. 240.) Plaintiff also identifies the order

of witnesses that he intends to call at trial. It is not the Court’s practice to issue a “trial schedule.” 

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion for a trial schedule is DENIED.

To the extent Plaintiff also requests transportation of incarcerated witnesses Sven Johnson,

Phillip Conti and Darrell King, the Court previously addressed transportation of these witnesses by

1

Case 1:05-cv-01022-BAM Document 248 Filed 01/15/13 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

separate order. On December 13, 2012, the Court granted Plaintiff’s request for production of

inmates Conti and King, but denied his request for production of inmate Johnson. Further, on 1

January 2, 2013, the Court ordered the transportation of witnesses Conti and King for trial. (ECF

Nos. 225 and 226.) Accordingly, to the extent Plaintiff is seeking additional orders of transportation,

his request is DENIED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: January 14, 2013 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe 

10c20k UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

The Court notes that Plaintiff’s objections regarding the order denying production of incarcerated witness

1

Sven Johnson are pending. (ECF No. 239.) Plaintiff’s objections will be addressed by separate order.

2

Case 1:05-cv-01022-BAM Document 248 Filed 01/15/13 Page 2 of 2