Espino v. Arnold
Plaintiff: Martin Espino
Defendant: Eric Arnold
Case Number: 2:2017cv02198
Filed: October 20, 2017
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office: Sacramento Office
County: Solano
Presiding Judge: Allison Claire
Presiding Judge: Morrison C. England
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
January 31, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 55 ORDER signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 1/30/23 ADOPTING in full 54 Findings and Recommendations and GRANTING 46 Defendants' motion to dismiss. Defendants' 48 motion for summary judgment is DENIED as having been rendered moot by this order. This action is DISMISSED, without prejudice, due to plaintiff's failure to prosecute this action and failure to obey court orders. CASE CLOSED (Kastilahn, A)
November 7, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 54 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 11/07/22 RECOMMENDING that defendants' motion to dismiss 46 be granted. Defendants' motion for summary judgment 48 be denied as moot; and this case be closed. Motions 46 and 48 referred to Judge Dale A. Drozd. Objections due within 14 days.(Plummer, M)
September 27, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 53 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 9/26/2022 ORDERING plaintiff to SHOW CAUSE in writing, within 30 days of the dates of this order, why this case should not be dismissed with prejudice for failure to prosecute. In the alternative, wi thin 30 days of the date of this order, plaintiff may file a response to 46 Motion to Compel and a response to 48 Motion for Summary Judgment. Plaintiff is cautioned that failure to respond to this order within the time allotted will result in a recommendation that this matter be dismissed with prejudice for failure to prosecute. (Huang, H)
June 15, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 47 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 06/14/22 ORDERING within 30 days of the date of this order, plaintiff shall file either: (1) an opposition to defendants' motion to compel written discovery 46 , or (2) a statement of non-oppo sition to the granting of the motion. Should plaintiff opt to file a statement of non-opposition to defendants' motion to compel, plaintiff must also respond to defendants' written discovery requests within the same thirty-day period.(Plummer, M)
January 7, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 45 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 1/06/22 GRANTING 44 Motion to modify the scheduling order. The parties may conduct discovery up to and including May 11, 2022. All pretrial motions, except motions to compel discovery, shall be filed on or before August 3, 2022. All other directives in the court's July 2021 Discovery and Scheduling Order 41 are to remain in full force and effect. (Plummer, M)
September 28, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 43 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 9/28/2021 GRANTING 42 Motion for Extension of Time; ORDERING parties may conduct discovery until 1/11/2022; ORDERING all pretrial motions, except motions to compel discovery, to be filed on or before 4/5/2022; and ORDERING all other directives in 41 Discovery and Scheduling Order remain in full force and effect. (Henshaw, R)
June 15, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 39 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 06/15/21 GRANTING 38 Motion to opt out of the ADR Project; and LIFTING the STAY of this action. Within 21 days from the date of this order, defendants shall file a responsive pleading. (Plummer, M)
May 14, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 37 ORDER REFERRING CASE TO POST-SCREENING ADR PROJECT AND STAYING CASE FOR 120 DAYS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 05/13/21. Defendants shall file any motion to opt out of the Post-Screening ADR Project no more than 30 days from the date of this order. 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. (Plummer, M)
March 22, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 29 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 3/22/2021 ORDERING the Clerk to add the following defendant names to the case caption of the docket: Jason Spencer, correctional officer at Solano State Prison; and Edwin Fernand, correctional officer at Solano State Prison. (Yin, K)
February 12, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 26 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 2/11/21 GRANTING IN PART 25 Motion for Preliminary Injunction, construed as a motion to compel. The Clerk of Court shall serve a copy of the first amended complaint 17 filed in this case together with a copy of this order on the current supervisor of civil rights actions at the Office of the Attorney General of the State of California. Within 30 days of the date of this order, the Office of the Attorney General shall make a special appearance to informally resolve and/or formally respond to substance of the motion for discovery. (cc: Monica Anderson, Attorney General) (Plummer, M)
January 9, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 20 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 1/8/2020 ORDERING the First Amended Complaint will not be served. Within 30 days, plaintiff may file a Second Amended Complaint. Failure to file a Second Amended Complaint within the time allotted may result in the dismissal of this action for failure to prosecute. (Yin, K)
January 3, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 19 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 1/02/20 DENYING 18 Motion to Compel. (Plummer, M)
October 16, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 16 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 10/16/2019 VACATING the 14 findings and recommendations issued by this court on 9/27/2019, and GRANTING plaintiff's 15 motion for an extension of time. Plaintiff has 60 days to file his amended complaint. Absent exigent circumstances, no further extensions of time will be granted. (Yin, K)
September 27, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 14 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 09/27/19 RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Referred to Judge Kimberly J. Mueller. Objections due within 14 days. (Plummer, M)
June 3, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 10 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 6/3/2019 DIRECTING MONTHLY PAYMENTS be made from Prison Account of Martin Espino. The custodial agency shall collect an initial partial filing fee and monthly payments in accordance with this order until the filing fee of $350 is paid in full. (cc: CDCR and Financial Department) (Henshaw, R)
October 24, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 4 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 10/24/2017 ORDERING Plaintiff to submit, within 30 days from the date of this order, a complete affidavit in support of his request to proceed IFP or the required fees in the amount of $400. (Henshaw, R)
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 Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Espino v. Arnold
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Martin Espino
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: Eric Arnold
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?