Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-00226/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-00226-12/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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARCUS R. WILLIAMS,

Plaintiff,

v.

KELLY HARRINGTON, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:12-cv-00226 LJO DLB PC

ORDER LIFTING STAY OF MOTION FOR 

SUMMARY JUDGMENT

[ECF No. 58]

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS 

LEAVE TO FILE SUPPLEMENT OR 

AMENDED MOTION FOR SUMMARY 

JUDGMENT

[SIXTY-DAY DEADLINE]

Plaintiff Marcus R. Williams is a prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this 

civil rights action. 

Plaintiff is proceeding on his Complaint filed February 17, 2012. The Court screened the 

Complaint and found that it stated a cognizable claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against 

Defendants S. Rios and S. Steward for excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment, 

Defendants D. Jayvinder and M. Stewart for deliberate indifference to a serious medical need in 

violation of the Eighth Amendment, and Defendants M.D. Biter, D. Page, Kelly Harrington, and 

M. Cabrera for deliberate indifference to conditions of confinement in violation of the Eighth

Amendment. The summons and complaint were thereafter served on Defendants. On October 

16, 2013, Defendants Biter, Carrera, Harrington, Page, Rios, and S. Stewart filed an answer to 

the Complaint. On October 18, 2013, a discovery and scheduling order was issued. The 

Case 1:12-cv-00226-LJO-EPG Document 72 Filed 10/05/15 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

discovery cut-off date was set for March 17, 2014, and the dispositive motion deadline was set 

for May 16, 2014.

On May 22, 2014, Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. Subsequently, the 

U.S. Marshal served Defendant M. Stewart, and Defendant Stewart filed an answer on October 

28, 2014. In light of certain outstanding discovery issues at the time, and the fact that Defendant 

M. Stewart had just been served, on October 24, 2014, the motion for summary judgment was 

stayed. On July 17, 2015, the Court resolved the last discovery dispute. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

1) The stay of Defendants’ motion for summary judgment is LIFTED;

2) Defendants are GRANTED sixty (60) days from the date of service of this order to 

supplement or amend their motion for summary judgment; 

3) Plaintiff is GRANTED thirty (30) days from the date of service of Defendants’ 

supplement or amended motion for summary judgment to file an opposition; and

4) Defendants MAY FILE a reply to opposition, if any, within fourteen (14) days from 

the date of service of Plaintiff’s opposition.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 5, 2015 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:12-cv-00226-LJO-EPG Document 72 Filed 10/05/15 Page 2 of 2