Tracy Taylor v. Hubbard et al

Filing 114

ORDER REQUESTING Defendants to SUBMIT a Copy of Plaintiff's Opposition to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss for Filing signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 7/30/2013. (Sant Agata, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

TRACY TAYLOR,

12
13

Plaintiff,
v.

14

SUSAN HUBBARD, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
17
18
19

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 1:10-cv-00404-LJO-BAM PC
ORDER REQUESTING DEFENDANTS TO
SUBMIT A COPY OF PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION
TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS FOR
FILING
(ECF Nos. 74, 91, 112)

Plaintiff Tracy Taylor (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis
in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
On September 17, 2012, Defendants Harrington and Wegman filed a motion to dismiss for

20

failure to exhaust administrative remedies. (ECF No. 74.) After several extensions of time, Plaintiff

21

did not file an opposition. However, on November 27, 2012, Defendants Harrington and Wegman

22

requested an extension of time to file their reply to Plaintiff’s opposition. (ECF No. 88.) In the

23

request, defense counsel indicated that he had received a paper copy of Plaintiff’s opposition to the

24

motion to dismiss on November 27, 2012. The opposition appeared to have been served on November

25

21, 2012, along with a copy of Plaintiff’s reply to his motion for preliminary injunction. (ECF No. 88,

26

p. 3.) The Court granted the requested extension and Defendants filed their reply to the motion to

27

dismiss on January 2, 2013. However, Plaintiff’s opposition to the motion to dismiss was never filed

28

with the Court.
1

1

On July 19, 2013, the Court directed Plaintiff to submit a copy of his opposition within thirty

2

days. The Court also indicated that if Plaintiff no longer had a copy of his opposition, then he should

3

notify the Court. At that point, the Court would direct Defendants to submit a copy for filing.

4

On July 29, 2013, Plaintiff filed a written notice that he no longer has a copy of his opposition.

5

Plaintiff explains that prison policy limits his possession of property and the remainder must be

6

destroyed. (ECF No. 113.)

7

Based on Plaintiff’s response, and in the interests of justice, the Court HEREBY REQUESTS

8

that Defendants Harrington and Wegman submit a copy of Plaintiff’s opposition to the motion to

9

dismiss within fourteen (14) days of the date of this order. If Defendants no longer have a copy of

10

Plaintiff’s opposition, they shall so notify the Court in writing within fourteen (14) days of the date of

11

this order.

12
13
14
15

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Barbara

July 30, 2013

A. McAuliffe

_

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2