Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-00229/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-00229-9/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

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

PAUL MONTANEZ, 

 Plaintiff,

 vs.

VELASCO, et al.,

 Defendants.

1:12-cv-00229-DAD-EPG-PC

ORDER FOLLOWING TELEPHONIC 

STATUS CONFERENCE HELD ON 

MARCH 28, 2016

ORDER VACATING DEADLINE FOR 

PLAINTIFF TO FILE OPPOSITION TO 

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

 

I. BACKGROUND

Plaintiff, Paul Montanez (“Plaintiff”), is an inmate at the Los Angeles County Jail

(“Jail”), proceeding with counsel in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ' 1983. This 

case is scheduled for a Settlement Conference before Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 

April 18, 2016 at 10:30 a.m. at the U.S. District Court in Fresno, California.

II. STATUS CONFERENCE

On March 28, 2016 at 10:00 a.m., a telephonic status conference was held before 

Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean. Attorney Justin Palmer appeared telephonically on behalf 

of Plaintiff, and California Deputy Attorney General Tiffany Johnson appeared telephonically 

on behalf of Defendants. 

The parties discussed the status of this case, the upcoming settlement conference, and 

whether Plaintiff will appear at the settlement conference in person or by telephone. 

Case 1:12-cv-00229-DAD-EPG Document 55 Filed 04/07/16 Page 1 of 3
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

Plaintiff’s counsel informed the Court that the Los Angeles County Sheriff (“Sheriff”) has 

indicated they will not comply with the Court’s Writ to transport Plaintiff from the Jail to the 

Court in Fresno.1 The Court and the parties agreed that Plaintiff’s appearance by telephone 

would be acceptable, but only if arrangements could be made for Plaintiff to remain on an open 

telephone line throughout the settlement conference. The Court indicated that the Court’s Writ 

will not be vacated unless the Court receives written assurance from the Jail or the Sheriff that 

such telephone arrangements will be made.

Plaintiff’s Counsel requested leave to amend the complaint and to conduct further 

discovery before trial. The Court made no rulings on these requests at the hearing, and 

Plaintiff’s Counsel agreed to postpone filing motions to amend and to conduct further 

discovery until after the settlement conference, if settlement does not succeed. The Court 

indicated that if settlement does not succeed, another status conference will be scheduled. 

Further, the parties agreed to vacate the deadline for Plaintiff to file an opposition to 

Defendants’ motion for summary judgment of March 21, 2016, pending the results of the 

settlement conference. 

III. CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff may appear telephonically at the settlement conference scheduled for 

April 18, 2016 at 10:30 a.m., but only if the Court receives written assurance 

from the Los Angeles County Jail or the Los Angeles County Sheriff that 

arrangements will be made for Plaintiff to remain on an open telephone line 

throughout the settlement conference. Until the Court receives written 

assurance, the Court’s Writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum issued on March 

15, 2016, compelling the Los Angeles County Sheriff to transport Plaintiff from 

 

1 On March 15, 2016, the Court issued a writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum, compelling the 

Los Angeles County Sheriff (“Sheriff”) to transport Plaintiff from the Jail to the U.S. District Court in Fresno for 

the settlement conference. (ECF No. 46.)

Case 1:12-cv-00229-DAD-EPG Document 55 Filed 04/07/16 Page 2 of 3
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

27

28

the Jail to the U.S. District Court in Fresno for the settlement conference, shall 

remain in force and shall not be vacated;

2. The deadline for Plaintiff to file an opposition to Defendants’ motion for 

summary judgment filed on March 21, 2016, is vacated pending the results of 

the April 18, 2016 settlement conference; 

3. If settlement does not succeed, the Court shall schedule a further status 

conference; and

4. The Clerk is directed to serve a copy of this order on the Los Angeles County 

Sheriff.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 6, 2016 /s/

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:12-cv-00229-DAD-EPG Document 55 Filed 04/07/16 Page 3 of 3