Whitely v. CDCR, 2:16-cv-1534-KJM-EFB P. (2018)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20180720802
Visitors: 32
Filed: Jul. 19, 2018
Latest Update: Jul. 19, 2018
Summary: ORDER EDMUND F. BRENNAN , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. 1983, has filed a motion to compel production of documents. ECF No. 25. Defendants timely filed an opposition to the motion. ECF No. 29. Plaintiff did not timely file a reply brief, see Local Rule 230( l ), but on June 4, 2018, filed what captioned as a "response to opposition" wherein he asks the court's permission to file a late reply. ECF No. 32. Pl
Summary: ORDER EDMUND F. BRENNAN , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. 1983, has filed a motion to compel production of documents. ECF No. 25. Defendants timely filed an opposition to the motion. ECF No. 29. Plaintiff did not timely file a reply brief, see Local Rule 230( l ), but on June 4, 2018, filed what captioned as a "response to opposition" wherein he asks the court's permission to file a late reply. ECF No. 32. Pla..
More
ORDER
EDMUND F. BRENNAN, Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, has filed a motion to compel production of documents. ECF No. 25. Defendants timely filed an opposition to the motion. ECF No. 29. Plaintiff did not timely file a reply brief, see Local Rule 230(l), but on June 4, 2018, filed what captioned as a "response to opposition" wherein he asks the court's permission to file a late reply. ECF No. 32. Plaintiff states that he should be given leave to do so because, on March 9, 2018, he was placed into administrative segregation and his property — including his legal documents — was confiscated. Id. at 2. Plaintiff was subsequently transferred to a different institution (R.J. Donovan Correctional Facility) and, upon arrival, was told that the property officer was on leave. Id. at 3. The motion does not specify when plaintiff recovered his property, nor does it propose a date by which a reply would be filed.
In light of the foregoing, plaintiff is granted additional time to file a reply. He shall file his reply within twenty-one (21) days of the date of this order. If he fails to do so, the matter will be deemed submitted and no further pleadings will be considered.
So Ordered.
Source: Leagle
