R. STEVEN WHALEN, Magistrate Judge.
On January 25, 2019, I granted Plaintiff's motion to extend time to respond to
Defendants' motion to dismiss and to file a brief of excess length, giving Plaintiff until March 8, 2019 to file is response. See Order [Doc. #38]. The Order was mailed to Plaintiff at the address he provided, but was returned as undeliverable on February 15, 2019 [Doc. #40]. It also appears that the February 7, 2019 Notice Regarding Parties' Responsibility to Notify Court of Address Changes [Doc. #39] may not have been received by the Plaintiff as well.
Apparently not having received the Order, Plaintiff has now filed a second motion for enlargement of time, in which he requests an extension to April 27, 2019 [Doc. #44]. The caption of that motion indicates that Plaintiff has been transferred to the Michigan Reformatory.
First, E.D. Mich. L.R. 11.2 requires a party to file a notice with the Clerk of the Court when his or her address has changed. Plaintiff did not do that.
In addition, I understand that Plaintiff's status as a prison inmate puts him at a relative disadvantage compared to a litigant in free society, and I am therefore inclined to give him some leeway in terms of reasonable extensions of time. However, the Defendants filed their motion to dismiss on December 17, 2018, and I already granted a generous extension to March 8, 2019. This case needs to move forward. Therefore, I will allow the Plaintiff another extension, but not for as long as he asks. Instead, Plaintiff's second motion to extend [Doc. #44] is GRANTED to the extent that he will file a response to Defendants' motion to dismiss [Doc. #31] on or before
Plaintiff may file a brief commensurate in length to Defendants' brief, that is, of up to 50 pages.
The Clerk will mail a copy of this Order to Plaintiff at the following address:
IT IS SO ORDERED.