Benyamini v. Manjuano et al

Filing 218

ORDER Denying Motion to Stay, Denying Request for Clarification, and Granting Motion for Extension of Time; 30-Day Deadline for Plaintiff to File Amended Opposition to Defendant Mandujano's Motion for Summary Judgment signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 11/08/2012. Amended Opposition due by 12/11/2012. (Flores, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

ROBERT BENYAMINI,

1:06-cv-01096-AWI-GSA-PC

11

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR STAY,
DENYING REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION,
AND GRANTING MOTION FOR EXTENSION
OF TIME
(Doc. 217.)

Plaintiff,
12
vs.
13
DEBBIE MANJUANO, et al.,
14
15

30-DAY DEADLINE FOR PLAINTIFF TO
FILE AMENDED OPPOSITION TO
DEFENDANT MANDUJANO’S MOTION
FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Defendants.

16
/
17
18

I.

19

BACKGROUND
Plaintiff is a former prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42

20

U.S.C. § 1983. On November 5, 2012, Plaintiff filed a motion to stay this action, or in the

21

alternative, for an extension of time to file an opposition to defendant Mandujano’s motion for

22

summary judgment. (Doc. 217.) Plaintiff also requests clarification from the Court. Id.

23

II.

24

MOTION FOR STAY
Plaintiff requests a stay of this action pending resolution of his appeal of the Court’s order

25

denying his motion for entry of default against defendant Mandujano. The appeal to which

26

Plaintiff refers, filed on September 6, 2012, was resolved by the Ninth Circuit’s order of

27

September 18, 2012, which dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. (Doc. 207.) Therefore,

28

Plaintiff’s request for stay shall be denied.
1

1

III.

2

MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME
In the alternative, Plaintiff requests an extension of time to file an opposition to defendant

3

Mandujano’s motion for summary judgment of August 8, 2011. Plaintiff seeks an extension of

4

time because he has been paroled and only recently re-gained access to his personal property. On

5

August 23, 2012, the Court granted Plaintiff leave to file an amended opposition to defendant

6

Mandujano’s motion for summary judgment, within thirty days. (Doc. 206.) Plaintiff has shown

7

good cause for another extension of this deadline.

8

IV.

9

REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION
Plaintiff also requests the Court to “correct and clarify the defendant’s [sic] Debbie

10

Mandujano’s motion.” (Motion, Doc. 217 at 2:23-24.) Plaintiff has not explained what

11

correction and clarification he seeks. Therefore, this request shall be denied.

12

V.

CONCLUSION

13

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

14

1.

Plaintiff’s motion for stay is DENIED;

15

2.

Plaintiff’s motion for extension of time is GRANTED;

16

3.

Plaintiff’s request for clarification and correction is DENIED; and

17

4.

Plaintiff is granted thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order in which

18

to file an amended opposition to defendant Mandujano’s motion for summary

19

judgment of August 8, 2011, pursuant to the Court’s order of August 23, 2012.

20
21
22

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
6i0kij

November 8, 2012

/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

23
24
25
26
27
28
2