Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-01519/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-01519-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
N. Grannis
Defendant
James E. Smith
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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

JAMES E. SMITH,

Plaintiff,

v.

N. GRANNIS, 

Defendant.

 /

1:07-CV-01519-OWW-SMS-P 

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

MANDATORY SCHEDULING

CONFERENCE

(Doc. 4)

 James E. Smith (“plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action

filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed the instant action on October 18, 2007. On

November 29, 2007, plaintiff filed a motion for an order setting a mandatory scheduling

conference and requiring the parties to confer.

Plaintiff is advised that because he is incarcerated and proceeds pro se, all pre-trial

motions will be submitted to the court without a hearing. See Local Rule 78-230(m).

Furthermore, the court is required to screen plaintiff’s complaint before the complaint will be

served on defendants. In light of the fact that plaintiff’s complaint has not been screened by the

court, a motion for a scheduling conference in this action is premature. 

In addition, pursuant to Local Rules, this action is exempt from the requirement of a

mandatory scheduling conference. Civil rights actions filed by prisoners proceeding pro se are

excepted from the mandatory scheduling order requirement pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.16(b). 

L. R. 16-240(c)(8). Plaintiff’s motion is therefore DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 5, 2007 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

Case 1:07-cv-01519-OWW -SMS Document 5 Filed 12/05/07 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

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:07-cv-01519-OWW -SMS Document 5 Filed 12/05/07 Page 2 of 2