Pfieffer

(PC) Stone v. Pfieffer

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJanuary 11, 20231:21-cv-01461California347 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ADAM JAY STONE, Case No. 1:21-cv-01461-ADA-SAB (PC)

Plaintiff, ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION

v. (ECF No. 70) C. PFEIFFER, et al., Defendants.

15 Plaintiff Adam Jay Stone is proceeding pro se in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for clarification, filed January 9, 2023. Plaintiff contends that he never requested to conduct settlement negotiations and he never sought reconsideration of the Court’s December 12, 2022, order. (ECF No. 70.) Rather, Plaintiff submits that he “is requesting the Court to clarify what is going on with his case in regards to this matter.” (Id. at 1.) As stated in the Court’s December 23, 2022, order, there is insufficient evidence to substantiate Plaintiff’s allegations regarding the “eavesdropping” of officers during the settlement conference in this case. In addition, the Court must defer to prison officials regarding the safety and security of…

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.