United States District Court, D. Nevada
MATTHEW J. SILVA, Plaintiff,
STATE OF NEVADA et al., Defendants.
J. KOPPE United States Magistrate Judge
March 20, 2017, the Court issued a screening order permitting
Plaintiff's American with Disabilities Act,
Rehabilitation Act, and Equal Protection Clause claims to
proceed against Defendant John/Jane Doe caseworker when
Plaintiff learned of his or her identity. (ECF No. 9 at 7).
The Court stated that, if Plaintiff was able to discover the
identity of John/Jane Doe caseworker, Plaintiff shall file a
motion to substitute the name of the Doe defendant in the
complaint. (Id. at 8). If Plaintiff timely filed a
motion to substitute identifying the name of the Doe
caseworker, the Court would issue an order staying the case
and referring the case to the Inmate Early Mediation Program.
March 29, 2017, Plaintiff filed a motion to substitute the
name of John Doe in the complaint to Thomas J. Martinez,
CCSII. (ECF No. 12 at 1-2). The Court grants the motion to
substitute John Doe caseworker as Defendant Thomas J.
Court denies Plaintiff's supplemental motion to submit
exhibits as to why his case should be reopened (ECF No. 7) as
moot. The Court reopened Plaintiff's case in the
screening order. (ECF No. 9 at 1-2). . . . .
foregoing reasons, IT IS ORDERED that the motion to
substitute the name of John Doe in the complaint to Thomas J.
Martinez, CCSII (ECF No. 12) is GRANTED.
FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall add Thomas
J. Martinez, CCSII as a defendant in this case.
FURTHER ORDERED that the John Doe caseworker referenced in
the screening order is identified as Defendant Thomas J.
FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to the Court's screening
order (ECF No. 9), this action shall proceed on the American
with Disabilities Act, Rehabilitation Act, and Equal
Protection Clause claims against Defendant Thomas J.
FURTHER ORDERED that given the nature of the claim(s) that
the Court has permitted to proceed, this action is STAYED for
ninety (90) days to allow Plaintiff and Defendant(s) an
opportunity to settle their dispute before the $350.00 filing
fee is paid, an answer is filed, or the discovery process
begins. During this ninety-day stay period, no other
pleadings or papers shall be filed in this case, and the
parties shall not engage in any discovery. The Court will
refer this case to the Court's Inmate Early Mediation
Program, and the Court will enter a subsequent order.
Regardless, on or before ninety (90) days from the date this
order is entered, the Office of the Attorney General shall
file the report form attached to this order regarding the
results of the 90-day stay, even if a stipulation for
dismissal is entered prior to the end of the 90-day stay. If
the parties proceed with this action, the Court will then
issue an order setting a date for Defendants to file an
answer or other response. Following the filing of an answer,
the Court will issue a scheduling order setting discovery and
dispositive motion deadlines.
FURTHER ORDERED that “settlement” may or may not
include payment of money damages. It also may or may not
include an agreement to resolve Plaintiff's issues
differently. A compromise agreement is one in which neither
party is completely satisfied with the result, but both have
given something up and both have obtained something in
FURTHER ORDERED that if the case does not settle, Plaintiff
will be required to pay the full $350.00 filing fee. This fee
cannot be waived. If Plaintiff is allowed to proceed in
forma pauperis, the fee will be paid in installments
from his prison trust account. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b). If
Plaintiff is not allowed to proceed in forma
pauperis, the $350.00 will be due immediately.
FURTHER ORDERED that if any party seeks to have this case
excluded from the inmate mediation program, that party shall
file a “motion to exclude case from mediation” on
or before twenty-one (21) days from the date of this order.
The responding party shall have seven (7) days to file a
response. No reply ...