Gallegos v. Seeley
Plaintiff: Alejandro Gallegos
Defendant: K. Seeley, M.D.
Case Number: 3:2018cv01322
Filed: June 18, 2018
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of California
Office: San Diego Office
County: San Bernardino
Presiding Judge: John A. Houston
Presiding Judge: Bernard G. Skomal
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
RSS Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
September 21, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 65 ORDER denying 58 Defendant Seeley's Motion for Summary Judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56. Signed by Judge John A. Houston on 9/21/2021. (jpp)
July 29, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 49 ORDER: 1. Denying Plaintiff's Third Motion for Appointment of Counsel (Doc. No. 42 ); 2. Granting Plaintiff's Request to Continue Final Pretrial Conference (Doc. No. 48 ); and 3. Scheduling Telephonic Status Hearing. The Proposed Pretria l Order is due by 12/2/2020. The Final Pretrial Conference is set for 12/9/2020 at 10:30 AM in Courtroom 13B before Judge John A. Houston. A telephonic Status Hearing is set for 8/26/2020 at 10:30 AM before Judge John A. Houston. Signed by Judge John A. Houston on 7/29/2020. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service) (tcf)
May 7, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 44 ORDER Granting 43 Defendant's Ex Parte Application to Continue Pretrial Dates and Second Amended Scheduling Order. A Proposed Pretrial Order is due by 8/24/2020. The Final Pretrial Conference is set for 8/31/2020 at 2:30 PM in Courtroom 13B before Judge John A. Houston. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael S. Berg on 5/7/2020. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service) (tcf)
January 27, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 40 ORDER Denying 32 Defendant Seeley's Motion for Summary Judgment Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56. Signed by Judge John A. Houston on 1/27/2020. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service) (tcf)
January 7, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 39 ORDER Granting 38 Defendant's Ex Parte Application to Continue Pretrial Dates and Amended Scheduling Order. A Proposed Pretrial Order is due by 5/25/2020. A Final Pretrial Conference is set for 6/1/2020 at 2:30 PM before Judge John A. Houston. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael S. Berg on 1/6/2020. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service) (tcf)
October 10, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 35 ORDER Denying 29 Plaintiff's Second Motion for Appointment of Counsel. Viewing the Wilborn factors together, the evidence before the Court does not demonstrate that Plaintiff enjoys a likelihood of success on the merits or that he is not able to articulate his claims and litigate his case without the assistance of an attorney. The Court thus finds Plaintiff has not established exceptional circumstances required for the appointment of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). The Court, therefore, DENIES Plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel without prejudice. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael S. Berg on 10/9/2019. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service) (tcf)
October 9, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 33 ORDER after Telephonic Status Conference. The Court held a Telephonic Status Conference on October 7, 2019 to discuss any issues regarding discovery and communication between Plaintiff and Defense Counsel. Plaintiff and Defense Counsel discussed Plai ntiff's discovery and communication concerns with the Court, and both Plaintiff and Defense Counsel agreed that there are no outstanding discovery issues between the parties. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael S. Berg on 10/8/2019. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service) (tcf)
July 31, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 26 ORDER Granting Defendant's Ex Parte Application to Waive Personal Appearance at Mandatory Settlement Conference. (ECF No. 25 ) The Court ORDERS Dr. Seeley to provide his contact information to defense counsel and to remain available by telephone for the duration of the MSC. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael S. Berg on 7/30/2019. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service) (tcf)
July 17, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 3 ORDER (1) granting 2 Plaintiff's Motion to Proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 USC 1915(a) and (2) Directing US Marshal to effect service of summons and complaint pursuant to 28 USC 1915(d) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(c)(3). The Court assesses no initial partial filing fee per 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). However, the entire $350 balance of the filing fees mandated will be collected by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) and forwarded to the Clerk of the Co urt pursuant to the installment payment provisions set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). (Order electronically transmitted to Secretary of CDCR). (Summons and IFP package prepared). Signed by Judge John A. Houston on 7/11/2018. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(jpp)
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the California Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Gallegos v. Seeley
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Alejandro Gallegos
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: K. Seeley, M.D.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?