Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_21-cv-00942/USCOURTS-caed-1_21-cv-00942-7/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

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PERCY LEE RHODES,

Plaintiff,

v.

JOSEPH RUIZ, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:21-cv-00942-JLT-CDB (PC) 

ORDER LIFTING PREVIOUSLY 

IMPOSED STAY

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF THE 

COURT TO ISSUE DISCOVERY AND 

SCHEDULING ORDER

Plaintiff Percy Lee Rhodes is a former pretrial detainee proceeding pro se in this civil 

rights action filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action proceeds on Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment 

deliberate indifference to serious medical needs claims against Defendants Ruiz, Lightner, and 

McComas, a First Amendment access to courts claim against Defendant Cortez, and Eighth 

Amendment failure to protect and failure to train claims against Defendants Lightner and 

McComas. 

I. RELEVANT PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On August 17, 2023, this Court issued its Order Referring Case to Post-Screening ADR 

and Staying Case for 90 Days. (Doc. 26.) Specifically, the Court ordered the parties to file notice, 

within 45 days, indicating whether they believed an early settlement conference would be 

productive in this matter. (Id. at 2.) 

//

Case 1:21-cv-00942-CDB Document 29 Filed 10/03/23 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

Plaintiff filed notice indicating his belief an early settlement conference would be 

productive. (Doc. 27.) However, on October 2, 2023, Defendants filed notice indicating they did 

not believe an early settlement conference would be productive. (Doc. 28.) 

Because all parties do not agree an early settlement conference would be productive, the 

Court will lift the previously imposed stay and issue a discovery and scheduling order. 

II. CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The previously imposed 90-day stay of this is action is LIFTED; and

2. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to issue a discovery and scheduling order in 

this matter.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 3, 2023 ___________________ _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:21-cv-00942-CDB Document 29 Filed 10/03/23 Page 2 of 2