From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Scott v. McDonald

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California
Mar 17, 2015
2:09-cv-0851-MCE-EFB P (E.D. Cal. Mar. 17, 2015)

Opinion


HOWARD SCOTT, Plaintiff, v. M. McDONALD, et al., Defendants. No. 2:09-cv-0851-MCE-EFB P United States District Court, E.D. California. March 17, 2015

          ORDER

          EDMUND F. BRENNAN, Magistrate Judge.

         Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Defendants' motions for summary judgment are pending but not yet submitted for decision. ECF Nos. 145, 164. The court stayed plaintiff's obligation to respond to the motions pending appointment of counsel for plaintiff. ECF No. 150. The court subsequently appointed counsel, but only for the limited purpose of assisting plaintiff with settlement negotiations, currently scheduled for April 7, 2015. ECF Nos. 166-168. Thus, plaintiff's oppositions to the motions are not yet due. Because the settlement negotiations may moot the summary judgment motions altogether, the court will deny them (ECF Nos. 145, 164) without prejudice to renewal within seven days of the April 7, 2015 settlement conference. If appropriate, the court will then issue a new schedule for briefing on the motions.

         So Ordered.


Summaries of

Scott v. McDonald

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California
Mar 17, 2015
2:09-cv-0851-MCE-EFB P (E.D. Cal. Mar. 17, 2015)
Case details for

Scott v. McDonald

Case Details

Full title:HOWARD SCOTT, Plaintiff, v. M. McDONALD, et al., Defendants.

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

Date published: Mar 17, 2015

Citations

2:09-cv-0851-MCE-EFB P (E.D. Cal. Mar. 17, 2015)