Ellis v. Baraceros et al
Benjamin Ellis |
Lyn Baraceros, Francis Ko and Narinder Saukhla |
2:2016cv01083 |
May 20, 2016 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
Sacramento Office |
Solano |
John A. Mendez |
Kendall J. Newman |
Civil Rights |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 46 ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 7/18/18 adopting 41 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS and granting in part and denying in part 33 Motion for Summary Judgment. (Kaminski, H) |
Filing 45 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 06/22/18 ORDERING that Plaintiff's 42 Request for subpoenas is DENIED as premature; plaintiff's 43 Motion for extension of time to file pretrial motions is GRANTED IN PART 43 ; D efendants' 44 motion to modify is GRANTED IN PART. The 06/22/18 deadline for filing pretrial motions is VACATED; and a modified discovery and scheduling order shall issue after the district court addresses the pending findings and recommendations. (Benson, A.) |
Filing 41 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 06/19/18 RECOMMENDING that defendants' motion for summary judgment 33 be granted as to plaintiff's medical deliberate indifference claims against defendant Barac eros, and such claims be dismissed without prejudice. Defendants' motion for summary judgment as to plaintiff's medical deliberate indifference claims against defendant Dr. Ko 33 be denied; and this action be remanded to the undersigned for further scheduling. Motion for Summary Judgment 33 referred to Judge John A. Mendez. Objections due within 14 days. (Plummer, M) |
Filing 35 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 2/21/2018 GRANTING 34 Motion for Extension of Time. Plaintiff granted 30 days from the date of this order in which to file an opposition to the motion for summary judgment. (Henshaw, R) |
Filing 28 ORDER and WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS AD TESTIFICANDUM ISSUED signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 09/13/17 ORDERING the Custodian to produce Benjamin Ellis on 10/25/17 at 9:00 a.m. in courtroom 25 before Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman. Custodian is ordered to notify the court of any changes in custody and to provide new custodian with a copy of this writ. Clerk shall serve a copy of this order and writ on the Custodian and Out-to-Court Desk. (cc: OTCD) (Plummer, M) |
Filing 20 ORDER REFERRING CASE TO POST-SCREENING ADR PROJECT AND STAYING CASE FOR 120 DAYS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 6/7/2017. The parties shall file the attached notice re settlement conference within 30 days of this order. The assigned DAG shall contact Courtroom Deputy, Matt Caspar, within 30 days to schedule a settlement conference. Each party shall submit a confidential settlement conference statement at least 7 days prior to the conference. If settlement is reached, the parties shall file a Notice of Settlement. The Clerk shall serve copies of (a) plaintiff's complaint, (b) the screening order, and (c) the instant order, on Supervising DAG Monica Anderson. (cc: Monica Anderson) (Yin, K) |
Filing 9 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 11/16/2016 GRANTING plaintiff's 2 request to proceed IFP. Plaintiff shall pay the $350.00 filing fee in accordance with the concurrent CDCR order. Plaintiff's 6 motion to amend is DENIED as moot. Plaintiff's amended complaint is DISMISSED. Plaintiff has 30 days to file a second amended complaint.(Yin, K) |
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 Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.