Contreas

(PC) Haynes v. Contreas

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJune 4, 20241:22-cv-00536California695 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9 RAYSHAWN HAYNES, 1:22-cv-00536-JLT-EPG (PC) 10 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ADDITIONAL DISCOVERY AND v. GRANTING IN PART MOTION FOR ADDITIONAL TIME TO RESPOND TO

F. CONTREAS, et al., MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

13 Defendants. (ECF No. 36) 14 Plaintiff Rayshawn Haynes is proceeding pro se in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This case proceeds on Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment excessive force claims against defendants Cleveland, Luna, Cloud, Orozco, Chan, and Contreas and his Fourteenth Amendment claim against defendant Rodriguez for unwanted medical treatment. (ECF No. 8 at 13). After Defendants appeared in this case (ECF No. 21) and all parties submitted statements related to scheduling and discovery (ECF Nos. 23, 27), the Court issued Scheduling (ECF No. 30) and Discovery orders (ECF No. 29) on August 17, 2023. Defendants moved for summary judgment on May 20, 2024. (ECF No. 34). …

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.