Ruiz
Ruiz v. City of Sacramento
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ----oo0oo---- 11
12 DANIEL GARZA, JOSHUA RUIZ, NO. 2:20-cv-01229-WBS-EFB
ELISABETH CROUCHLEY, STEVEN
13 PASSAL, RUSSELL VREELAND,
ANTHONY PIRES, JOHN RUFFNER,
14 and JENNIFER LORET DE MOLA, on behalf of themselves and a 15 class of similarly situated persons, 16 Plaintiffs, 17 v. 18
CITY OF SACRAMENTO,
19 SACRAMENTO POLICE DEPARTMENT, DANIEL HAHN, and DOES 1 to 20 225, 21 Defendants. 22 23 ----oo0oo---- 24 STATUS (PRETRIAL SCHEDULING) ORDER 25 After reviewing the parties’ Joint Status Report, the 26 court hereby vacates the Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference 27 scheduled for October 13, 2020, and makes the following findings 28 and orders without needing to consult with the parties any 1 further. 2 I. SERVICE OF PROCESS 3 All defendants have been served,1 and no further 4 service is permitted without leave of court, good cause having 5 been shown under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b). 6 II. JOINDER OF PARTIES/AMENDMENTS 7 No…