Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_18-cv-01115/USCOURTS-cand-5_18-cv-01115-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
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 

Northern District of Californi

a

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

JACOB S. SILVERMAN,

Plaintiff, 

v. 

DUANE CHRISTIAN, et al., 

 Defendants. 

Case No. 18-01115 BLF (PR) 

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR 

SCHEDULING RECOMMENDATION 

(Docket No. 32)

 

Plaintiff, a California inmate, filed a pro se civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 

U.S.C. § 1983. On May 9, 2018, the Court ordered service on Defendant Duane Christian 

for violating Plaintiff’s First Amendment right to petition the government for redress of 

grievances based on his refusal to allow Plaintiff to file grievances. (Docket No. 5.) 

Currently, Defendant’s dispositive motion is due no later than February 18, 2019. (Docket 

No. 31.) The Court also granted Defendant’s motion to compel Plaintiff to appear for and 

submit to an oral deposition upon proper notice by Defendant’s counsel. (Id.) 

Plaintiff has filed a “motion for judicial recommendation and consideration of 

scheduling” with respect to a pending deposition with Defendant’s counsel, apparently 

scheduled for December 12, 2018. (Docket No. 32.) Plaintiff seeks a court order 

recommending a rescheduling due to Plaintiff’s criminal trial being set for around the same 

Case 5:18-cv-01115-BLF Document 33 Filed 12/10/18 Page 1 of 2
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 

United States District Court 

Northern District of Californi

a

time. The motion is DENIED as unnecessary. Plaintiff should discuss the matter directly 

with Defendant’s counsel rather than needlessly involving the Court in these scheduling 

matters. Plaintiff is directed to discuss, in good faith, all matters involving deposition and 

discovery directly with Defendant’s counsel before seeking Court involvement. 

 This order terminates Docket No. 32. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: _____________________ ________________________ 

BETH LABSON FREEMAN 

United States District Judge 

Order Denying Motion for Scheduling Recommendation 

PRO-SE\BLF\CR.18\01115Silverman_deny-sched 

Case 5:18-cv-01115-BLF Document 33 Filed 12/10/18 Page 2 of 2