(PC) Tran v. Turner, et al., No. 2:2015cv00200 - Document 46 (E.D. Cal. 2017)
Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 10/31/17 RECOMMENDING that plaintiff's motion for stay 27 be denied. re 27 MOTION to put case on hold filed by Binh C. Tran. referred to Judge Morrison C. England Jr. Objections due within 14 days. (Plummer, M)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 BINH C. TRAN, 11 No. 2:15-cv-0200 MCE DB P Plaintiff, 12 v. 13 JOKSCH, 14 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Defendant. 15 16 Plaintiff, is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 17 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the court is plaintiff’s motion to stay this action pending his 18 transfer to another institution. 19 The United States Supreme Court has clearly indicated that “the power to stay 20 proceedings is incidental to the power inherent in every court to control the disposition of the 21 causes on its docket with economy of time and effort for itself, for counsel, and for litigants. 22 How this can best be done calls for the exercise of judgment, which must weigh competing 23 interests and maintain an even balance.” Landis v. North American Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254–55 24 (1936). In this regard, “the proponent of the stay bears the burden of establishing its need.” 25 Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681, 706 (1997). 26 Plaintiff has failed to show why a stay of these proceedings is necessary. Though plaintiff 27 expresses concern about missing court orders and motions that may result in the dismissal of this 28 action, the record reveals no such prejudice. No dispositive motions have yet been filed in this 1 1 case, and the single court order that was returned as undeliverable was re-served on plaintiff 2 following receipt of his notice of change of address. 3 4 5 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that plaintiff’s motion for stay (ECF No. 27) be denied. These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge 6 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 7 after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 8 objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. The document should be captioned 9 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the 10 objections shall be filed and served within seven days after service of the objections. The parties 11 are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may result in waiver of the 12 right to appeal the district court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 1991). 13 Dated: October 31, 2017 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 /DLB7; DB/Inbox/Substantive/tran0200.stay.fr 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
