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)

Download PDF
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

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?