Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_17-cv-04202/USCOURTS-cand-3_17-cv-04202-8/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RICHARD LANCE REYNOLDS,

Plaintiff,

v.

J. MERENDA,

Defendant.

Case No. 17-cv-04202-SI 

ORDER FOR CASE MANAGEMENT 

STATEMENTS

This is a pro se prisoner’s civil rights action in which plaintiff alleges that defendant twice 

used excessive force on him on April 5, 2016 at the Correctional Training Facility in Soledad. 

Summary judgment was granted on the claim that defendant used excessive force in connection with 

handcuffing plaintiff, leaving for adjudication only a claim that defendant later used excessive force 

on plaintiff in an office at the prison. See Docket No. 29. A settlement conference was held earlier 

this year, but the parties apparently were unable to reach a settlement. See Docket No. 34.1

This action has been pending for more than two years, and it is now time to move toward 

trial. The parties may be ready for trial right now, but the court wants some information from them 

so that the court can, among other things, set a discovery cut-off and a trial date. Accordingly, the 

parties must file and serve case management statements no later than April 10, 2020, in which they 

provide the following information:

1 According to Magistrate Judge Illman’s report on the settlement conference, “[t]he parties 

are unable to reach an agreement at this time. There is an offer of settlement that will remain open 

for 30 days from the date of the settlement conference.” Docket No. 34 at 2. Neither party has 

reported that the settlement offer has been accepted. If, in fact, the parties have reached a settlement, 

they should promptly notify the court.

Case 3:17-cv-04202-SI Document 35 Filed 03/11/20 Page 1 of 2
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

(1) Discovery. Describe specifically the discovery that remains to be done. State 

who/what you plan to subpoena and who you plan to depose. State whether you plan to 

request a production of documents, propound interrogatories, and/or make a request for 

admissions. Propose a discovery schedule (that includes the approximate date on which each 

discovery request will be made) and a discovery cut-off date. 

(2) Further motions. State whether you intend to file any further motions and 

specifically identify those motions.

(3) Trial planning. State the date on which you will be ready for trial, and list the 

dates of any pre-arranged vacations or other dates of unavailability in the next twelve 

months. Provide an estimate of the number of days needed for trial. List the names of all of 

your intended witnesses for trial.2 For each such witness, state briefly the testimony 

expected from that witness. List the types of experts that you intend to call as witnesses.

(4) Plaintiff’s custodial status. Plaintiff should state the length of his prison sentence 

and the date on which he expects to be released from custody, if he knows that date.

The case management statements do not need to be jointly prepared.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 11, 2020

______________________________________

SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

2 Plaintiff is informed that he needs to make arrangements to pay witness fees and expert 

witness fees. The expenditure of public funds on behalf of an indigent litigant is proper only when 

authorized by Congress. See United States v. MacCollom, 426 U.S. 317, 321 (1976); Tedder v. 

Odel, 890 F.2d 210, 211 (9th Cir. 1989). The in forma pauperis statute does not authorize the district 

court to waive witness fees or expenses paid to the witnesses, see Dixon v. Ylst, 990 F.2d 478, 480 

(9th Cir. 1992); Tedder, 890 F.2d at 211-12. Therefore, even though plaintiff is proceeding in forma 

pauperis, he must make arrangements to pay witness fees and travel expenses for any witnesses he 

intends to call at trial.

Case 3:17-cv-04202-SI Document 35 Filed 03/11/20 Page 2 of 2