ORDER

DALE A. DROZD, Magistrate Judge.

Plaintiff is a former state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12131 et seq.

Defendants have filed a motion for relief from the provisions of Local Rule 230(1), on the grounds that plaintiff has been released from state prison and now resides in Sacramento, California.

Local Rule 230(l), entitled "Motions in Prisoner Actions," provides:

Id. If the court were to grant defendants' motion, those provisions of Local Rule 230 that ordinarily apply in non-prisoner cases would henceforth apply to this action. In particular, the parties would gain the ability to calendar motions for hearing before the undersigned, oppositions to such motions would be due fourteen days prior to the hearing date, and replies, if any, would be due seven days prior to the hearing date.

Plaintiff has filed an opposition in which he argues that because the action commenced subject to those provisions of the Local Rules that govern civil actions brought by prisoners, this action should continue to proceed under those provisions. (ECF No. 34 at 1.) Plaintiff also points out that many state prisoners are re-incarcerated shortly after having been released from custody, and consequently argues that "[t]his Court has hundreds of pending prisoner cases, and it would create an enormous burden, with little benefit, to change the designation of a case, along with the resultant procedural changes, with each change of a litigant's custody status." (Id. at 2.)

In reply, defendants state that they seek relief only from the provisions of Local Rule 230(1), and concede that if plaintiff returns to custody, Local Rule 230(l) would again govern this action.

Having carefully considered the parties' arguments, the court determines defendants' motion to be meritorious, and accordingly, finds that Local Rule 230(l) no longer applies to this action. In so deciding, the court recognizes that it may be difficult for plaintiff, given his disability and potential lack of access to transportation, to travel to the U.S. District Court in Sacramento for scheduled hearings in this case. If travel to the court poses any difficulty, plaintiff is advised that he may appear for hearings by telephone by following the undersigned's Case Management Procedures, a copy of which will be served upon him together with this order. Alternately, if plaintiff does not wish to make an appearance at a hearing (whether in person or by telephone), he may file a notice so indicating with the court.

For all of the reasons set forth above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Defendants' motion for an order finding Local Rule 230(l) no longer applicable to this action (ECF No. 33) is granted.

2. Defendants' motion nunc pro tunc for a two-day extension of time to July 8, 2015 to file their reply (ECF No. 35) is granted.1

3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of the undersigned's Case Management Procedures on plaintiff.

Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd (DAD)

United States District Court — Eastern District of California

Courtroom #27

Courtroom Deputy: Pete Buzo

Office: (916) 930-4128

email: pbuzo@caed.uscourts.gov

Criminal Duty Schedule: Contact Courtroom Clerk

Civil Law and Motion:

Civil law and motion is heard every Friday at 10:00 a.m. Contact courtroom deputy for available law and motion dates.

DATES ARE NOT RESERVERD. File moving papers in accordance with the Local and Federal Rules.

Parties interested in appearing by telephone are to contact Pete Buzo 48-hours before a scheduled hearing and provide a land line number. Judge Drozd does not issue Tentative Rulings.

Criminal Law and Motion:

Criminal misdemeanor calendar is heard every Tuesday at 10:00 a.m.

DATES ARE NOT RESERVERD. File moving papers in accordance with the Local and Federal Rules.

Jury Trials: Jury Trials set on Monday's at 10:00 a.m. Dark on Friday's.

Court Trials: Court Trials are heard on Wednesday's at 9:00 a.m.