Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-04662/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-04662-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

1

The settlement conference was scheduled for the morning of Tuesday, July 6, 2010,

the first work day after the long July 4th holiday weekend. On Friday, July 2, defendants

electronically filed a motion for administrative relief to cancel the settlement conference, on

the ground defendants were not inclined to settle the case. (Docket No. 45.) In view of the

motion having been filed only one work day before the scheduled settlement conference, the

motion was not reviewed by the Court until after the settlement conference had been held. 

Consequently, the motion is hereby DENIED as moot. 

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAHIR ALBERTO ROJAS,

Plaintiff,

 v.

R. LOZA, Correctional Officer, R.

SINGH, Correctional Officer, D.

SANDOVAL, Correctional Officer,

Defendants. ______________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 07-4662 MMC (PR) 

ORDER REFERRING PLAINTIFF TO

FEDERAL PRO BONO PROJECT;

STAYING PROCEEDINGS PENDING

APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL;

DENYING ADMINISTRATIVE

MOTION FOR RELIEF TO CANCEL

SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE;

DIRECTIONS TO CLERK

(Docket No. 45)

On September 10, 2007, plaintiff, a California prisoner currently incarcerated at

Tehachapi State Prison, and proceeding pro se, filed the above-titled civil rights action under

42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging the use of excessive force, in violation of the Eighth Amendment,

by correctional officers at Salinas Valley State Prison (“SVSP”). Thereafter, the Court

denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment. The case was referred to Magistrate

Judge Vadas to conduct settlement proceedings; on July 26, 2010, Magistrate Judge Vadas

notified the Court that the case had not settled.1

 

Case 3:07-cv-04662-MMC Document 49 Filed 08/03/10 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

Good cause appearing, plaintiff is hereby REFERRED to the Federal Pro Bono

Project for the purpose of locating an attorney to represent plaintiff in this matter. 

The Clerk of the court shall forward to the Federal Pro Bono Project: (1) a copy of this

order, (2) a memorandum outlining the facts and procedural posture of the action, and (3) a

copy of the court file.

Upon an attorney being located to represent plaintiff, that attorney shall be appointed

as counsel for plaintiff in this matter until further order of the Court.

All proceedings in this action are hereby STAYED until four weeks from the date an

attorney is appointed to represent plaintiff in the instant action.

This order terminates Docket No. 45.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: August 3, 2010 __________________________________ MAXINE M. CHESNEY 

United States District Judge 

Case 3:07-cv-04662-MMC Document 49 Filed 08/03/10 Page 2 of 2