Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-00150/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-00150-1/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

Plaintiff Gary Ray Bettencourt (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 

in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On May 3, 2016, the Court issued an order 

requiring Plaintiff to file a consent or decline form or show cause why this action should not be 

dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to obey a court order. (ECF No. 7.) 

Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for deposition of evidence. (ECF No. 8.) In the 

motion, Plaintiff discusses his previous filings in this case, and identifies a typographical error in one 

of the Defendants’ names. The error will be corrected in a separate order. Plaintiff also expresses some 

GARY RAY BETTENCOURT,

 Plaintiff,

v.

L. PARKS, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:16-cv-00150-BAM (PC)

ORDER DISCHARGING ORDER TO SHOW 

CAUSE WHY ACTION SHOULD NOT BE 

DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

(ECF No. 7)

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR 

DEPOSITION OF EVIDENCE

(ECF No. 8)

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK’S OFFICE TO 

RANDOMLY ASSIGN A DISTRICT JUDGE TO 

THIS ACTION

Case 1:16-cv-00150-KES-BAM Document 9 Filed 05/23/16 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

concern that the caption does not contain the full name of every party. The Court confirms for Plaintiff 

that a short-form caption is appropriately used in some of the Court’s orders, and he should not be 

concerned at this time.

Plaintiff next states that he received the Court’s previous order regarding consent or requesting 

reassignment, and that he declines to consent to a United States Magistrate Judge. He has also attached 

the signed and dated form to his filing. (ECF No. 8, p. 11.) Consequently, as Plaintiff has now 

complied with the Court’s prior order, the order to show cause will be discharged. The Court cautions 

Plaintiff, however, that he must timely comply with future orders.

Plaintiff next discusses the mailings he has received from the Court, and some concerns that he 

may not have received all the Court’s mail to him. However, judging from his descriptions in this and 

other prior filings, it appears that he has received all of the Court’s orders and mailings that have been 

sent as of the date of the current motion. 

Finally, Plaintiff seeks an order for a deposition and to conduct other discovery to gather 

evidence for his case. Plaintiff’s request for discovery is premature and shall be denied without 

prejudice. The Court has not screened Plaintiff’s complaint to determine whether it is subject to 

dismissal or whether the action should proceed to discovery on Plaintiff’s claims. 28 U.S.C. § 

1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) (“Notwithstanding any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that may have been paid, 

the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that . . . the action or appeal . . . fails 

to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.”). The complaint has not been ordered served, no 

defendants have appeared and discovery has not been opened. Plaintiff’s complaint will be screened in 

due course. 

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Order to Show Cause issued on May 3, 2016, is DISCHARGED;

2. Plaintiff’s motion for discovery is DENIED, without prejudice, as premature; and

////

///

///

///

Case 1:16-cv-00150-KES-BAM Document 9 Filed 05/23/16 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

3. The Clerk is directed to randomly assign this action to a United States District Judge 

pursuant to Plaintiff’s request and decline to consent to a United States Magistrate Judge.

4. The complaint will be screened in due course.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 23, 2016 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:16-cv-00150-KES-BAM Document 9 Filed 05/23/16 Page 3 of 3