Ruiz
Ruiz v. Aragon
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ELIAS C. RUIZ, No. 1:22-cv-1468 DAD DB Plaintiff, v. ORDER TOMAS J. ARAGON, in his official capacity, et al., 15 Defendants. 17 Pursuant to Rule 16(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the undersigned has reviewed the parties’ joint status report (ECF No. 51) and has determined that the court need not “consult[] with the parties’ attorneys and any unrepresented parties at a scheduling conference,” before issuing a scheduling order in this case. Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(1)(B). Accordingly, the undersigned vacates the initial scheduling conference set for December 22, 2023, and hereby issues this scheduling order. I. SERVICE OF PROCESS The named defendants have been served as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5. No further service is permitted without leave of court, good cause having been shown under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b). //// II. JOINDER OF ADDITIONAL PARTIES /…