(PS) Ringgold v. Burgett Inc.
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
EDWARD RINGGOLD, No. 2:22-cv-00836-DAD-CKD PS Plaintiff, v. ORDER AND BURGETT, INC., doing business as
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
PIANODISC, et al.,
Defendants.
17 Plaintiff Edward Ringgold proceeds pro se in this civil action with claims against his former employer, Burgett, Inc., doing business as Pianodisc.1 This action proceeds on claim one and claims five through fifteen in plaintiff’s first amended complaint. (See ECF No. 19, First Amended Complaint.) In two motions presently before the court, plaintiff seeks to have a trial date set within 90- 120 days and seeks “timely responses from defendant.” (ECF Nos. 52, 53.) The parties appeared via videoconference for a hearing on July 19, 2023. Attorney Arielle Rediger appeared on behalf of defendant and Mr. Ringgold appeared pro se. For the reasons set forth below, the court will deny plaintiff’s motion for a trial date and motion for timely responses from defendant. Sua 27 1…