Opinion
2:21-cv-1636 DAD DB P
02-14-2023
VENCIL C. GREEN, Plaintiff, v. VAL LACEBAL, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
DEBOFAH BARNES, UNTIED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
Plaintiff, an inmate proceeding pro se, seeks relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff claims defendants violated his First Amendment rights by retaliating against him for filing a lawsuit. Presently before the court is defendants' motion to opt out of the Post-Screening ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) Project. (ECF No. 32.)
In support of the motion, counsel for defendants states that after initial research into the claims and a discussion with plaintiff they have determined that a settlement conference would be a waste of court resources. (ECF No. 32 at 1.) Specifically, counsel states that they have investigated plaintiff's claims and, based on those findings, believe this action can be resolved with the filing of dispositive motions. (Id. at 1-2.) Defense counsel also spoke with plaintiff and consulted with defense counsel's supervisor. (Id. at 1.) Upon review, the undersigned finds good cause to grant the motion.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Defendants' motion to opt out (ECF No. 32) is granted;
2. The stay of this action is lifted; and
3. Within sixty days of the date of this order, defendants shall file a responsive pleading.