Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_97-cv-05767/USCOURTS-caed-1_97-cv-05767-6/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ALLEN ANTHONY FULTON, )

)

Plaintiff, )

v. )

)

E. MADRUGA, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

)

)

)

CV F 97-5767 OWW DLB P

ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANTS

TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION TO STAY PROCEEDINGS

(DOC 313)

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a civil rights

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. section 1983. This case is scheduled for a jury trial on March 7,

2006. On September 8, 2005, plaintiff filed a motion to stay these proceedings. On September

12, 2005, the Court ordered defendants to respond to the motion. Defendants filed an opposition

on October 3, 2005.

In his motion, plaintiff states that he has been temporarily transferred pending court

proceedings and he is unable to prepare this case for trial. Plaintiff seeks a stay of these

proceedings until his other court matter is resolved. Defendants oppose a stay as premature and

unnecessary. Defendants point out that the trial is not scheduled until March 2006, with

plaintiff’s pretrial statement due on December 12, 2005 and defendants’ pretrial statement due

Case 1:97-cv-05767-OWW -DLB Document 319 Filed 10/20/05 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

January 9, 2006. There are no other deadlines before December 2005.

The Court agrees that a stay of the proceedings is unnecessary at this time. Plaintiff states

that he has been transferred for other Court proceedings and does not know when he will return

to Salinas Valley State Prison. The Court will not stay the proceedings for an indefinite period of

time. It may be that plaintiff will return to Salinas Valley State Prison within a short period of

time, making further delay of these proceedings unnecessary. This case has been pending since

1997 and further delay is not in either party’s interest.

Accordingly, plaintiff’s motion for a stay of these proceedings is HEREBY DENIED

without prejudice to renewing the motion at a later date should it become necessary. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: October 19, 2005 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

3b142a UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:97-cv-05767-OWW -DLB Document 319 Filed 10/20/05 Page 2 of 2