Richardson v. Bryant, et al

Filing 128

ORDER GRANTING Defendant's Request for Extension of Time to Notify the Court Re Whether Settlement Conference Would be Benefical 117 , signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 7/10/09: Defendant must comply with this order on or before 7/27/09.(Hellings, J)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: Plaintiff Patrick Richardson ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. This action is proceeding on Plaintiff's second amended complaint, filed July 3, 2007, against only Defendant Captain D. Ortiz ("Defendant") for denial of Plaintiff's access to the courts. (Doc. 85.) On May 28, 2009, Defendant filed a request for an extension of time to comply with the Court's order of May 20, 2009, which required the parties to notify the Court within thirty days whether a settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Nandor Vadas would be beneficial in this case. (Doc. 117.) Good cause having been presented to the Court, and GOOD CAUSE v. H. L. BRYANT, et al., Defendants. / PATRICK RICHARDSON, Plaintiff, 1:99-cv-06575-OWW-GSA PC ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO NOTIFY THE COURT RE WHETHER SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE WOULD BE BENEFICIAL (Doc. 117.) DEADLINE JULY 27, 2009 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA APPEARING THEREFOR, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. 2. Defendant's motion for extension of time is GRANTED; and Defendant shall notify the Court in writing, on or before July 27, 2009, whether a settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Nandor Vadas would be beneficial in this case, pursuant to the Court's order of May 20, 2009. July 10, 2009 /s/ Gary S. Austin 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 6i0kij UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?