Cates

(PC) Clay v. Cates

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaSeptember 28, 20201:20-cv-00971California432 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 DEANGELO CLAY, No. 1:20-cv-00971-EPG (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

FOR SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE

v. WITHOUT PREJUDICE CATES, (ECF No. 7) Defendant. 16 Plaintiff DeAngelo Clay (“Plaintiff”) is a state inmate proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Defendant Cates, the warden at Plaintiff’s institution of confinement. Plaintiff filed the Complaint commencing this action on July 14, 2020. (ECF No. 1). On September 9, 2020, Plaintiff filed a motion for settlement conference. (ECF No. 7). For the following reasons, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s motion. Plaintiff argues that the Court “set a date to settle this case in a settlement conference” because “it would be in the best interest of justice to settle this case amicably and save the court a[ ]lot of time and resources.” (ECF No. 7 at 1). Plaintiff also…

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.