(PC) Flow-Sunkett v. T. Redmon

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 GLENN SUNKETT, Case No. 1:21-cv-01137-HBK (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER STAYING PLAINTIFF’S

RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION

v. FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT T. BOERUM and T. REDMON, (Doc. No. 58) Defendants. 16 On June 18, 2024, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss, which is ripe for review and now pending before the Court. (Doc. Nos. 55, 56, 57). On September 6, 2024, Defendants filed an exhaustion-based Motion for Summary Judgment, which is currently pending a response from Plaintiff. (Doc. No. 58). Because the earlier-filed Motion to Dismiss (“MTD”) may be dispositive of the case and thus render moot the Motion for Summary Judgment (“MSJ”), the Court finds it appropriate to stay the Motion for Summary Judgment pending the Court’s ruling on the Motion to Dismiss. A federal court enjoys “broad discretion to stay proceedings as an incident to its power to control its own docket.” Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681,…