Rodriguez

(PC) Crane v. Rodriguez

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaDecember 7, 20202:15-cv-00208California3,257 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 RICHARD JOSEPH CRANE, No. 2:15-cv-0208 TLN KJN P Plaintiff, v. ORDER AND REVISED SCHEDULING

ORDER

RODRIGUEZ, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding pro se, in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff requests that the court appoint counsel. On June 29, 2020, defendants filed a response. Following extensions of time, plaintiff filed a reply on September 21, 2020. As discussed below, the undersigned denies the motion, and sets a further schedule for this case. I. Plaintiff’s Complaint This action proceeds on plaintiff’s second amended complaint against defendants Davey, Rodriguez, Robinette, Barton, Probst and Weeks based on incidents in 2011 and 2013. (ECF No. 16.) The court found plaintiff stated potentially cognizable First and Eighth Amendment claims for relief based on plaintiff’s allegations that such defendants conspired to violate his civil rights while plaintiff was…

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.