Haynes v. Sisto

Full title: ROBERT HAYNES, Plaintiff, v. D.K. SISTO, et al., Defendants.

Court: United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California

Date published: Dec 4, 2013

2:08-cv-2177 DAD P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 4, 2013)

Opinion

ROBERT HAYNES, Plaintiff, v. D.K. SISTO, et al., Defendants. No. 2:08-cv-2177 DAD P United States District Court, E.D. California. December 4, 2013

          ORDER

          DALE A. DROZD, Magistrate Judge.

         Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding through counsel with this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The parties have consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

         On April 22, 2013, the undersigned conducted a settlement conference. As a result of those negotiations, the parties settled the case and placed the terms and conditions of the settlement on the record in open court. The parties were ordered to file dismissal documents within seven months of the April 22, 2013 conference. Seven months from that date have now passed, and the parties have not yet filed the required dismissal documents.

         Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that within ten days of the date of this order the parties shall file dismissal documents or a status report explaining the status of the documents.