Slama v. City of Madera, et al

Filing 89

ORDER DENYING, AS MOOT, plaintiff's Motion for an Extension of Time to File Opposition to Defendants' Motions for Summary Judgment, document 88 , as plaintiff has previously been granted an extension re same; order signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 1/23/2012. (Rooney, M)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6
7

ANTHONY DEAN SLAMA,

CASE NO. 1:08-cv-00810-AWI-SKO

8

ORDER DENYING AS MOOT
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR AN
EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE AN
OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’
MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT

Plaintiff,
9
v.
10
11

CITY OF MADERA, et al.,
(Docket No. 88)

12
Defendants.
13
/
14
15

On January 18, 2012, Plaintiff Anthony Dean Slama (“Plaintiff”), a prisoner proceeding pro

16

se and in forma pauperis, filed a motion requesting an extension of time to file an opposition to

17

Defendants’ motions for summary judgment. (Doc. 88.)

18

Previously, on January 13, 2012, the Court issued an order (Doc. 87) granting Plaintiff’s

19

request for an extension of time to file a motion pursuant to Rule 56(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil

20

Procedure or, alternatively, to file his response to Defendants’ motions for summary judgment.

21

(Doc. 85.) Pursuant to the Court’s order, Plaintiff’s motion or response is due by February 27, 2012,

22

and, absent truly good cause, no further extensions of time will be granted.

23

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s instant motion is DENIED AS MOOT as Plaintiff has previously

24

been granted an extension of time to file his response.

25

IT IS SO ORDERED.

26

Dated:
ie14hj

27
28

January 23, 2012

/s/ Sheila K. Oberto
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE