Filed: Jun. 27, 2014
Latest Update: Jun. 27, 2014
Summary: ORDER DAVID C. KEESLER, Magistrate Judge. THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE COURT on pro se Plaintiff's "Motion To Stay" (Document No. 16) filed June 27, 2014. This motion has been referred to the undersigned Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b), and immediate review is appropriate. Having carefully considered the motion, the record, and applicable authority, the undersigned will deny the motion. By the instant motion, Plaintiff seeks to stay this action until she is "able to find a
Summary: ORDER DAVID C. KEESLER, Magistrate Judge. THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE COURT on pro se Plaintiff's "Motion To Stay" (Document No. 16) filed June 27, 2014. This motion has been referred to the undersigned Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b), and immediate review is appropriate. Having carefully considered the motion, the record, and applicable authority, the undersigned will deny the motion. By the instant motion, Plaintiff seeks to stay this action until she is "able to find a n..
More
ORDER
DAVID C. KEESLER, Magistrate Judge.
THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE COURT on pro se Plaintiff's "Motion To Stay" (Document No. 16) filed June 27, 2014. This motion has been referred to the undersigned Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), and immediate review is appropriate. Having carefully considered the motion, the record, and applicable authority, the undersigned will deny the motion.
By the instant motion, Plaintiff seeks to stay this action until she is "able to find a new counsel." (Document No. 16, p.2). The undersigned notes, however, that on May 29, 2014, the Court granted Plaintiff's former counsel's "Motion To Withdraw As Counsel" (Document No. 14), and specifically ordered that:
Plaintiff will represent herself in this action until new counsel files a Notice of Appearance on her behalf. Plaintiff is responsible for participating in this litigation in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Local Rules of this Court, and the "Case Management Order" (Document No. 13).
(Document No. 15, pp.1-2). It appears that Plaintiff has been aware of the need for new counsel since on or about April 24, 2014, but despite her efforts has been unable to find anyone to agree to represent her. (Document No. 16, p.2).
The undersigned does not find that the instant motion provides sufficient cause for the Court to reverse its previous Order requiring Plaintiff to proceed pro se until new counsel files a Notice Of Appearance. Plaintiff's motion suggests that she has made diligent efforts to hire counsel with no success, but there is no forecast of how much longer her search might last. (Document No. 16). Under these circumstances, the Court is not inclined to delay this matter indefinitely, and as previously ordered, Plaintiff must be prepared to represent herself until she finds counsel.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that Plaintiff's "Motion To Stay" (Document No. 16) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
SO ORDERED.
