Demerson v. Woodford et al

Filing 165

ORDER Granting Third Extension Of Time To File Opposition (Doc. 164 ), signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 3/4/2013. (Opposition due by 4/8/2013)(Fahrney, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9

EDWARD DEMERSON,

10
11

CASE NO. 1:08-cv-00144-LJO-SKO PC

Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING THIRD EXTENSION OF
TIME TO FILE OPPOSITION

v.
(Doc. 164)

12

JEANNE S. WOODFORD, et al.,

13

Defendants.

THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE
/
14
15

Plaintiff Edward Demerson, a former state prisoner proceeding pro, filed this civil rights

16

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on January 29, 2008. This action is proceeding on Plaintiff’s

17

second amended complaint, filed on June 24, 2009, against Defendants Phillips, Campos, Amaro,

18

Clausing, Bardonnex, Munoz, and Cartagina for using excessive physical force against Plaintiff, and

19

against Defendants Munoz, Cartagina, Gregory, and Hillard for acting with deliberate indifference

20

toward Plaintiff’s resulting injuries, in violation of the Eighth Amendment of the United States

21

Constitution.

22

Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment on October 29, 2012. Plaintiff has

23

subsequently sought and been granted two extensions of time to file his opposition. On March 1,

24

2013, Plaintiff filed his third motion seeking an extension of time. In light of Plaintiff’s recent

25

release from prison, evidence that he has pneumonia, and representation that he is arranging for

26

stable housing, the Court will grant Plaintiff a third extension of time. However, Plaintiff has had

27

more than four months to draft his opposition and notwithstanding his need to treat his pneumonia

28

and finalize stable housing arrangements, Plaintiff’s release from custody has removed the
1

1

impediment to his ability to complete and mail his opposition caused by his incarceration. Plaintiff

2

is required to exercise due diligence and the Court anticipates he will do so within the next thirty

3

days. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1).

4
5

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s third motion for an extension of time is GRANTED and he shall file
his opposition within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order.

6
7

IT IS SO ORDERED.

8

Dated:
i0d3h8

March 4, 2013

/s/ Sheila K. Oberto
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2