Abdullah v. Dacuycuy

Full title: HANIF S. ABDULLAH, Plaintiff, v. DACUYCUY, Defendant.

Court: United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Jul 31, 2023

2:19-cv-00804 TLN DB P (E.D. Cal. Jul. 31, 2023)

Opinion

2:19-cv-00804 TLN DB P

07-31-2023

HANIF S. ABDULLAH, Plaintiff, v. DACUYCUY, Defendant.

DEEORAH BARNES, UNTIED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

ORDER

DEEORAH BARNES, UNTIED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Plaintiff is a former state prisoner proceeding through counsel with this action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The time for filing dispositive motions has expired and the dispositive motion filed was resolved. Before the court sets a further schedule for this litigation, including due dates for pretrial statements, the court inquires as to each party's position on the usefulness of scheduling a settlement conference, which may take place via videoconference.¹Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that within 14 days of the date of this order, each party shall file a notice briefly stating whether or not the party believes scheduling a settlement conference would be useful at this time.

1 This case was previously referred to the court's Post-Screening ADR Project. (ECF No. 32.) No conference settlement conference was held. (ECF No. 38.)