Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-00807/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-00807-17/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

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

MICHAEL J. PAYAN,

Plaintiff,

vs.

H. TATE, et al., 

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

1:13cv00807 LJO DLB PC

ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S 

MOTION FOR INSTRUCTION, COUNSEL 

AND ADDITIONAL TIME

(Document 73)

Plaintiff Michael J. Payan (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis, filed this civil rights action on May 28, 2013. This action is proceeding on the 

following cognizable claims: (1) retaliation in violation of the First Amendment by Defendants 

Bingamon, Tate and Vu; and (2) deliberate indifference to a serious medical need in violation of 

the Eighth Amendment against Defendants Bingamon, Tate, Vu, Sheisha and Joaquin.

The action is currently in discovery. 

On May 19, 2015, Defendants filed a timely motion for summary judgment based on 

exhaustion. The motion is pending. 

On June 3, 2015, the Court stayed merits-based discovery pending the outcome of the 

motion for summary judgment.

Case 1:13-cv-00807-LJO-BAM Document 74 Filed 08/17/15 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

On June 22, 2015, Plaintiff filed a motion to amend his complaint. The motion is 

pending. 

On July 31, 2015, Plaintiff filed a motion in which he asks for the Court’s “instruction” 

regarding the two pending motions. 

The Court has reviewed the docket and it appears that both motions are fully briefed and 

are ready for decision. Plaintiff has specifically responded to Defendants’ argument that his 

claims are unexhausted and the Court needs no further information at this time. It will rule on 

the motions in due course.

Plaintiff’s related request for counsel and additional time are DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 17, 2015 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:13-cv-00807-LJO-BAM Document 74 Filed 08/17/15 Page 2 of 2