IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

 

FELIX D. WHITTINGTON, : CIVIL ACTION 

 : 

 Plaintiff : 

 : 

v. : 

: 

DONALD VAUGHN, et al., : 

 : 

 Defendants : No. 02-4346 

ORDER

 And now, this day of , 2003, upon consideration of the motion of 

the Commonwealth defendants’1 to stay pretrial proceedings, pending disposition of their motion 

for summary judgment, and Plaintiff’s response thereto, if any, it is hereby ORDERED that the 

said motion is GRANTED. It is further ORDERED that the parties’ filing obligations under the 

July 2, 2003 scheduling order herein and placement of this case in the trial pool are stayed, 

pending disposition of the motion for summary judgment filed by the Commonwealth 

defendants. A revised schedule will be issued if that motion for summary judgment is not 

granted in its entirety. 

 BY THE COURT 

 

 

 MARVIN KATZ, S.J. 

 

1

 “Commonwealth defendants” refers to the following defendants: the State Correctional 

Institution at Graterford; Donald Vaughn; Mary Canino; Francis “Skip” Field; Thomas Buzzar; 

David DiGuglielmo; and Guy Smith.

Case 2:02-cv-04346-MK Document 93 Filed 10/23/2003 Page 1 of 5
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

 

FELIX D. WHITTINGTON, : CIVIL ACTION 

 : 

 Plaintiff : 

 : 

vi. : 

: 

DONALD VAUGHN, et al., : 

 : 

 Defendants : No. 02-4346 

COMMONWEALTH DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO STAY PRETRIAL SUBMISSIONS 

AND PROCEEDINGS PENDING DISPOSITION OF THEIR MOTION FOR 

SUMMARY JUDGMENT

 The Commonwealth defendants’,2

 by their attorney Kevin R. Bradford, Deputy Attorney 

General, hereby request that the Court stay further proceedings herein pending disposition of 

their motion for summary judgment. In support of this motion, the Commonwealth defendants 

state: 

1. This is a pro se prisoner’s civil rights action. Plaintiff is currently incarcerated at the 

State Correctional Institution at Greene, located in Waynesburg, Pennsylvania. 

 

2

 The following Commonwealth of Pennsylvania employees and entities are named as 

defendants: the State Correctional Institution at Graterford (“SCI Graterford”); Donald Vaughn, 

the ex-Superintendent of SCI Graterford and current Deputy Secretary of the Eastern Region of 

the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections (“DOC”); Mary Canino, a DOC Hearing Examiner; 

and Francis “Skip” Feild, a Major at SCI Graterford (collectively, “Commonwealth defendants”). 

There are other Commonwealth employees that are not listed in the caption of the Complaint nor 

on the Court’s docket, but are named on page 2 of Plaintiff’s Complaint in a section where each 

defendant is to be described. These individuals are David DiGuglielmo, the ex-Deputy for 

Facility Management and current Acting Superintendent at SCI Graterford; Thomas Buzzar, a 

Major at SCI Graterford; and Guy Smith, a Captain at SCI Graterford. For the sake of clarity 

and comprehensiveness, the aforementioned Commonwealth agency and employees will all be 

considered defendants and collectively referred to as the “Commonwealth defendants.”

Case 2:02-cv-04346-MK Document 93 Filed 10/23/2003 Page 2 of 5
- 2 -

2. On July 2, 2003, the Court entered a scheduling order calling for the completion of 

discovery by October 1, 2003; the filing of pretrial memoranda and other materials on certain 

dates thereafter; and placement of this case in the trial pool on November 5, 2003. 

3. To date Plaintiff has failed to meet any of these filing obligations. Plaintiff’s pretrial 

memorandum and related materials were due on October 14, 2003. 

4. The Commonwealth defendants have filed a motion for summary judgment in their favor, 

which is pending as of this date. In this motion, the Commonwealth defendants have attempted 

to structure Plaintiff’s claims and allegations in a somewhat coherent and organized manner – 

something completely lacking in Plaintiff’s Complaint. 

5. Plaintiff has not yet responded to this motion and, pursuant to the Local Rule 7.1 (c), he 

has until October 31, 2003 to do so.3

6. If the motion of the Commonwealth defendants is granted in its entirety, the case against 

them will not have to be tried, and there will be no need for them (or Plaintiff) to file a pretrial 

memorandum or other pretrial submissions at all. If the motion is granted in part and denied in 

part, the triable issues will at least be narrowed. 

7. After the Commonwealth defendants commenced in their effort to comply with the July 

2, 2003 scheduling order regarding the submission of a pretrial memorandum and related 

materials, it became clear that creating these documents at this stage of the proceedings would 

provide hardly any meaningful information. The Commonwealth defendants cannot prepare 

meaningful, useful pretrial submissions, or prepare for trial in an intelligent and efficient manner, 

without knowing which of plaintiff’s claims and allegations, if any, will proceed to trial. 

 

3

 Although Local Rule 7.1 (c) calls for a response to a motion within 14 days, where the motion 

is served by mail, as it was here, three days are added to the response time. Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(e). 

Case 2:02-cv-04346-MK Document 93 Filed 10/23/2003 Page 3 of 5
- 3 -

8. A stay of the parties’ filing obligations under the July 2, 2003 scheduling order, and of 

the placement of this trial in the trial pool, pending disposition of the Commonwealth 

defendant’s motion for summary judgment will enable the parties, counsel, and the Court to use 

available time and resources more efficiently and effectively. 

9. This motion is not made with any dilatory intent 

 WHEREFORE, the Commonwealth defendants pray for an order a) staying the parties’ 

obligations to file pretrial memoranda and other submissions, pending disposition of their motion 

for summary judgment; b) staying placement of this case in the trial pool, pending disposition of 

their motion for summary judgment; and c) affording such further relief is just and proper. 

 D. MICHAEL FISHER 

 ATTORNEY GENERAL 

 BY: s/ Kevin Bradford 

 Kevin R. Bradford 

 Deputy Attorney General 

 Identification No. 88576 

 Susan J. Forney 

 Chief Deputy Attorney General 

 Chief, Litigation Section 

OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL 

21 South 12th Street, 3rd Floor 

Philadelphia, PA 19107 

Telephone: (215) 560-2262 

Case 2:02-cv-04346-MK Document 93 Filed 10/23/2003 Page 4 of 5
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

 

FELIX D. WHITTINGTON, : CIVIL ACTION 

 : 

 Plaintiff : 

 : 

v. : 

: 

DONALD VAUGHN, et al., : 

 : 

 Defendants : No. 02-4346 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

 I, Kevin R. Bradford, Deputy Attorney General, hereby certify that the within Motion to 

Stay Pretrial Submissions and Proceedings was electronically filed and is available for viewing 

and downloading from the ECF system at https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/. 

 I further certify that a true and correct copy of this document was mailed on October 23, 

2003, by first class mail, postage prepaid to: 

 Felix D. Whittington 

 Inmate No. AY-4935 

 State Correctional Institution 

 at Greene 

 175 Progress Drive 

 Waynesburg, PA 15370 

 D. MICHAEL FISHER 

 ATTORNEY GENERAL 

 BY: s/ Kevin Bradford 

 Kevin R. Bradford 

 Deputy Attorney General 

 Identification No. 88576 

 Susan J. Forney 

 Chief Deputy Attorney General 

 Chief, Litigation Section 

OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL 

21 South 12th Street, 3rd Floor 

Philadelphia, PA 19107 

Telephone: (215) 560-2262 

Case 2:02-cv-04346-MK Document 93 Filed 10/23/2003 Page 5 of 5