THOMAS v. REAGAN

USDC Cr. No. 84-3552

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
WILLIAM THOMAS                 
           Plaintiff,          
                               
      vs.                      
                               
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et. al.          Civil Action No. 84-3552
          Defendants                        FILED
                                          OCT 8 1986
                                   CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT
                                      DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

ORDER

Upon consideration of the representations of the plaintiff, appearing pro se, and counsel for the party defendants made at a status conference before the U. S, Magistrate on September 30, 1986 and a review of all pending matters within the jurisdiction of the U. S. Magistrate to determine under 28 U.S.C. S636(b), and in coordination with the Court as to the scheduling of trial, it is now hereby this 8th day of October, 1986,

ORDERED:

1. That the trial set for October 20, 1986 is hereby reset for the period of December 15-20, 1986 pursuant to direction of the Court (Oberdorfer, J.).

2. That the plaintiff, pro se, and counsel for the defendants shall appear in Courtroom 25, U. S. District Court for argument of the pending motions for summary judgment on November 14, 1986 at 9:30 a.m., after which the Hagistrate will submit a Memorandum Opinion, Reprot and Recommendation for disposition thereof pnsuant to the Court's Order of Reference, filed September 26, 1986.

3. That Plaintiff's Secord Motion for Judicial Notice, dated August 27, 1986, be and is hereby DENIED without prejudice to renew at such time as the matters referred to may become relevant in these proceedings.

2

4. The plaintiff's motion for joinder of parties, clains, and remedies, filed Septenber 2, 1986, with due consideration being given to tbe Pederal defendants' opposition, filed Septaober IS, 1986, plaintiff'e reply, filed October 2, 1986, and the entire record in this case is hereby DENIED as untimely and without any factual basis in the discovery record of this case.

5. Tne piaintiff's m>tion for review and certification of transcripts, filed Septanber 12, 1986, is hereby DENIED inasnuch as the tapes of the recorded depositions will be available for review by the Magistrate and the Court in further proceedirrgs in this case.

6. The plaintiff's motion for reconsideration of earlier lrptians for sumnary judgment, filed September 22, 1986, is hereby DENIED, without prejudice to renewing these motions before the Court after submission of the Magistrate's Report and Recomendation on the defendants' pending summary judgment motions.

7. The plaintiff's motion, styled "Re-application for temporary Restraining Order", and plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction and motion for oonsolidation of hearing with trial on tbe merits, all filed on September 22, 1986, are hereby DENIED, as raising matters beyond the scope of this case as restricted by the Court's Order of June 5, 1986 and as previously decided adversely to to plaintiff.

8. The plaintiff's motion for joinder of plaintiffs and class action certification, filed September 22, 1986, is hereby DENIED.

3

9. The plaintiff's motion far leave to file amended restatement of claim and opposition to Federal defendants' motion for judgment on the Administrative Record to the extent it seeks to file a constitutional challenge to the regulations, 36 C.F.R. 50.19(e)(9),(10),(11)(12), certification of a class action and to join additional plaintiffs is hereby DENIED.

10. The plaintriff's motion for review and certification of transcripts, filed September 23, 1986, is hereby DENIED,

11. The plaintiff's rrrotion for extension of time to file his witness list and jury instructions to complete his trial brief, filed September 19, 1986, is hereby GRANTED, the requirement to do so being hereby suspended until after hearing on the pending motions for summary judgment set for November 14, 1986.

12. The plaintiff's motion to supplement trial exhibits, filed September 30, 1986, is hereby GRANTED.

13. The oral nrotion of counsel for the defendant Michael Canfield for an extension until October 10, 1986 to reply to plaintiff's opposition to his motion for summary judgment is hereby GRANTED nunc pro tunc, September 30, 1986.

14. The oral motion of counsel for the Federal defendants for an extension until October 10, 1986 to reply to plaintiff's opposition to these defendants' motion for summary judgment until October 10, 1986, is hereby GRANTED, nuc pro tunc September 30, 1986.

ARTHUR L. BURNETT SR.
Date: October 8, 1986

Case Listing --- Proposition One ---- Peace Park