Dillingham v. Garcia, 1:18-cv-00579-LJO-EPG (PC). (2019)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20190605d03
Visitors: 22
Filed: May 31, 2019
Latest Update: May 31, 2019
Summary: ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS TO FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (ECF NO. 46) ERICA P. GROSJEAN , Magistrate Judge . Jerry Dillingham ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. On May 28, 2019, Plaintiff filed "Objections to Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean Findings and Recommendations Order (Dkt. No. 37.)". (ECF No. 46). Plaintiff asks that no settlement conference be set at this time, a
Summary: ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS TO FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (ECF NO. 46) ERICA P. GROSJEAN , Magistrate Judge . Jerry Dillingham ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. On May 28, 2019, Plaintiff filed "Objections to Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean Findings and Recommendations Order (Dkt. No. 37.)". (ECF No. 46). Plaintiff asks that no settlement conference be set at this time, an..
More
ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS TO FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
(ECF NO. 46)
ERICA P. GROSJEAN, Magistrate Judge.
Jerry Dillingham ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
On May 28, 2019, Plaintiff filed "Objections to Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean Findings and Recommendations Order (Dkt. No. 37.)". (ECF No. 46). Plaintiff asks that no settlement conference be set at this time, and that he be appointed counsel.
While the Court did not issue findings and recommendations, it will address Plaintiff's "objections." As to Plaintiff's request that no settlement conference be set at this time, the Court will not be setting a settlement conference at this time.
As to Plaintiff's request for counsel, it is DENIED. The Court is still unable to make a determination that Plaintiff is likely to succeed on the merits of his claims. Moreover, with the assistance Plaintiff is currently getting, it appears that Plaintiff is able to adequately articulate his claims.
Plaintiff is advised that he is not precluded from renewing his motion for appointment of pro bono counsel at a later stage of the proceedings.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
