Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_08-cv-00624/USCOURTS-casd-3_08-cv-00624-2/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

08cv0624

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CHRISTOPHER CHARLES ALEXANDER

CLACK, CDCR #F-98816,

Civil No. 08-0624 IEG (RBB)

Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’

EX PARTE MOTIONS TO

CONTINUE PRETRIAL DATES

[Doc. No. 47]

vs.

DEPUTY WILLIAM LATIMER #3275;

DEPUTY HOENIG, #2840, 

SAN DIEGO COUNTY SHERIFF’S

DEPARTMENT,

Defendants.

Plaintiff is proceeding in pro se and in forma pauperis with this civil rights action filed

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On August 31, 2009 the Court granted in part and denied in part

Defendants’ motion for summary judgment. (Doc. No. 41.) Plaintiff subsequently failed to

appear telephonically at the mandatory settlement conference on September 22, 2009. 

Magistrate Judge Brooks accordingly issued an order to show cause stating that Plaintiff must

submit a declaration explaining his failure to appear no later than October 6, 2009. (Doc. No.

45.) Defendants William Latimer has submitted an ex parte application requesting the Court to

continue the pretrial dates in this case for sixty days in light of Plaintiff’s failure to appear at the

settlement conference and the resultant uncertainty with respect to Plaintiff’s intentions of

pursuing this case. (Doc. No. 47.) Upon consideration of Defendant’s request, and good cause

Case 3:08-cv-00624-IEG-RBB Document 48 Filed 09/24/09 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 08cv0624

appearing, the Court GRANTS the Defendant’s application and continues the pretrial conference

from October 13, 2009 to December 14, 2009. Magistrate Judge Brooks shall issue an amended

scheduling order incorporating Defendant’s requested changes and the new pretrial conference date. The

amended scheduling order shall also adjust filing deadlines relevant to the new pretrial conference date,

as necessary.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: September 24, 2009

IRMA E. GONZALEZ, Chief Judge

United States District Court

 

Case 3:08-cv-00624-IEG-RBB Document 48 Filed 09/24/09 Page 2 of 2