Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05935/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05935-6/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

BRUCE PATRICK HANEY,

Plaintiff,

v.

SALDANA, et. al.,

Defendants.

 /

1:04-CV-05935-AWI-SMS-P 

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO PROCEED

IN OPEN COURT

ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR UPDATE

OF STATUS OF CASE

(Doc. 28)

 Bruce Patrick Haney (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On May 15, 2007, Plaintiff

filed a motion to proceed in open court with this action. Plaintiff requests to litigate all issues in

his case in open court, in person. Plaintiff also requests an update of the status of his case.

In regards to Plaintiff's request for an update of the status of his case, due to the large

number of civil actions pending before the court, the court is unable to respond in writing to

individual inquiries regarding the status of a case. As long as parties keep the court apprised of

their most current addresses, they will receive all court decisions which may affect the status of

the case. See Local Rule 83-183(b). Therefore, Plaintiff's request for an update of the status of

his case shall be denied.

In regards to Plaintiff's motion to proceed in open court with all the issues in this action,

Case 1:04-cv-05935-AWI-SMS Document 29 Filed 05/21/07 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

all motions, except motions to dismiss for lack of prosecution, filed in cases wherein one party is

incarcerated and proceeding in propria persona, shall be submitted upon the record without oral

argument unless otherwise ordered by the Court. See Local Rule 78-230(m). Such motions are

not noticed on the motion calendar, and the parties do not appear in open court to resolve such

motions. Id. Plaintiff is incarcerated and proceeding in propria persona with this action. 

Plaintiff has not presented sufficient reasons for the Court to order oral argument for all issues in

his case. Although oral argument is appropriate under some circumstances to resolve one or

more motions in an action brought by a plaintiff who is incarcerated and proceeding in propria

persona, the court does not lightly use its discretion to order court appearances in such a case. 

Plaintiff argues that proceeding in open court will prevent delays by Defendants. In this court’s

experience, requiring court appearances does not prevent delays. In fact, requiring an inmate to

make court appearances presents procedural problems that cause delay and confusion. 

Transporting inmates to and from court is costly and involves the coordination of multiple

agencies. Delay often arises from the frequent transfer of inmates to other facilities or

institutions and the changes in address that occur when inmates are released on parole. 

Therefore, the court declines to issue an order for Plaintiff to proceed in open court with all

issues in this action.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's request for an update of the status of his case is DENIED, and

2. Plaintiff's motion to proceed in open court is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 21, 2007 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-05935-AWI-SMS Document 29 Filed 05/21/07 Page 2 of 2