Garcia v. Grimm, et al
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|January 23, 2012
ORDER: The Petitions for Writ of Habeas Ad Testificandum and Motion for Order for Subpoenas filed by Plaintiff Filipe Noe Garcia (Docs. 190 , 219 ) are denied. The bench trial set for 1/31/2012 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 4 is vacated and reset to 4/17/2012 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 4. Signed by Judge William Q. Hayes on 1/23/2012. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service.) (mdc)
|June 21, 2011
ORDER: The (Doc. 171 ) Motion for Writ of Habeas Corpus Ad Testificandum filed by Plaintiff Filipe Noe Garcia is denied. Plaintiff may file any motion for writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum regarding Julio Contreras, Rodney Brooks, Robert Marin, or David Cano by 10/12/2011. Plaintiff shall file a sworn affidavit establishing the appropriateness of the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum as to each witness. Defendants may respond to the motion for writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum by 11/7/2011. Signed by Judge William Q. Hayes on 6/21/2011. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service.) (mdc)
|March 2, 2011
ORDER: The (Doc. 152 ) Motion for Summary Judgment is granted as to Plaintiff's second claim of deliberate indifference to medical needs against Grimm, Hightower, Rhinelander, Setter, Swiney, MacLeod, Massey, Neagles, and Grijalva; fourth claim of violation of the due process clause against Grimm; and sixth claim of conspiracy against Defendants Grimm, Hightower, Rhinelander, Setter, Swiney, MacLeod, Massey, Neagles, and Grijalva and denied as to Plaintiff's claim of assault. The (Doc . 144 ) Petition for a Writ of Habeas Ad Testificandum, the (Doc. 145 ) Motion for Order Subpoenas for Plaintiff's Witness, the (Doc. 146 ) Motion for Attendance of Incarcerated Witness, and the (Doc. 168 ) Motion for Status Update filed by Plaintiff are denied as moot. The Court will dismiss this action without prejudice as to Dr. Gabel and Gonzalez on or after thirty days from the date of this order, unless, no later than that date, Plaintiff files either (1) proof that service of the summons and complaint was timely effectuated or (2) a declaration under penalty of perjury showing good cause for failure to timely serve the Defendants with the summons and complaint accompanied by a motion for leave to serve process outside of the 120 day period. Plaintiff shall file his Third Amended Proposed Pretrial Order, motion for a writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum, and his affidavit in support of his motion on or before sixty days from the date of this order. Defendant shall file any response to the Third Amended Proposed Pretrial Order and any response to the motion for a writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum on or before fifteen days from the date the Third Amended Proposed Pretrial Order, motion for a writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum, and affidavit in support are filed. The Court will hold a Final Pretrial Conference on 6/17/2011 at 09:30 AM. Signed by Judge William Q. Hayes on 3/2/2011. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service.) (mdc)
|August 16, 2010
ORDER: Plaintiff's (Doc. 150 ) Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order is denied as moot. Plaintiff's (Doc. 156 ) Motion for a Writ of Mandamus is denied as moot. Plaintiff's objection that filing a motion for summary judgment is im proper is denied. Plaintiff's (Doc. 162 ) Motion to Appoint Counsel is denied. Plaintiff may file an additional opposition to Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment by 9/20/2010. Defendants' reply must be filed by 10/4/2010. The Court will set a hearing date for the motion. Signed by Judge William Q. Hayes on 8/13/2010. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service; per Order, a copy of the Local Rules also was mailed to Plaintiff.) (mdc)
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
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?