Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00776/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00776-22/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PUNAOFO TSUGITO TILEI

Plaintiff,

v.

T. WAN, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:06-cv-00776-OWW-GSA PC

ORDER LIFTING STAY FOLLOWING

SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE

(Docs. 72 and 80)

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

AS MOOT

(Doc. 79)

This is a civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and California law by Punaofo

Tsugito Tilei, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis. This action is proceeding

on Plaintiff’s amended complaint, filed July 30, 2007, against Defendants Wan, Gallagher, and

Cooper for retaliation in violation of the First Amendment, and for denial of due process in violation

of the Fourteenth Amendment. On January 23, 2009, the Court issued a scheduling ordersetting the

discovery deadline for September 30, 2009, and the pretrial dispositive motion deadline for

November 30, 2009. 

On August 28, 2009, the parties filed a stipulation requesting that this case be referred to the

Pro Se Mediation program to explore settlement. The Court granted the request and referred this

matter to United States Magistrate Judge Nandor J. Vadas for a settlement conference, which was

set for December 15, 2009. Pursuant to the Court’s order filed November 12, 2009, the scheduling

orderin this action was stayed pending the settlement conference and receipt of Judge Vadas’s status

1

Case 1:06-cv-00776-JLT Document 82 Filed 01/21/10 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

report. On January 19, 2010, Judge Vadas filed a status report notifying the Court that the case did

not settle. 

In light of Judge Vadas’s report, the stay in this action shall be lifted, and Plaintiff’s motion

seeking a lift of the stay, filed January 11, 2010, shall be denied as moot. The Court has under

submission Plaintiff’s motions to compel, and motion for an order permitting him to communicate

with inmate Ly. A ruling will be issued in due course. Once the Court has resolved the pending

discoverymotions, it will set a new discoverydeadline, and a new deadline to file pretrial dispositive

motions.

Accordingly, based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The stay in this action is lifted; and

2. Plaintiff’s motion to lift the stay, filed January 11, 2010, is denied as moot.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: January 20, 2010 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

6i0kij UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2

Case 1:06-cv-00776-JLT Document 82 Filed 01/21/10 Page 2 of 2