Porter v. Jennings et al

Filing 92

ORDER GRANTING Plaintiff's 68 75 76 82 Extensionof time to file opposition, signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 9/28/2012. (Opposition Deadline: 10/31/2012)(Figueroa, O)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

SAMUEL KENNETH PORTER,

11

Plaintiff,

12
13

v.
JENNINGS, et al.,

14

Defendants.

Case No. 1:10-cv-01811-AWI-DLB PC
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF
EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE
OPPOSITION
(ECF Nos. 68, 75, 76, 82)
OPPOSITION DUE WITHIN THIRTY DAYS

15
Plaintiff Samuel Kenneth Porter (“Plaintiff”) is a prisoner in the custody of the California

16
17

Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”). Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in

18

forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action is proceeding on

19

Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint, filed April 14, 2011, against Defendants Jennings, Lowe, and

20

Darlene Austin for violation of the Eighth Amendment. On June 25, 2012, Defendants Jennings and

21

Lowe filed a motion for summary judgment. ECF No. 66. On July 5, 2012, Plaintiff filed a motion

22

for extension of time to prepare an opposition. ECF No. 68. On August 3, 2012, Plaintiff filed a

23

motion for the Court to provide a court deadline for Plaintiff to prepare his opposition. ECF No. 75.

24

On August 6, 2012, Plaintiff filed a motion pursuant to Rule 56(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil

25

Procedure. ECF No. 76. On September 10, 2012, Plaintiff filed a motion for a continuance. ECF

26

No. 82. The Court will address all of the above motions by this order.

27

I.

28

July 5, 2012 Motion
Plaintiff requests an extension of time to file an opposition to Defendants’ motion for
1

1

summary judgment. Plaintiff explains that he celebrated the religious festival of Ramadan which

2

would delay his filing. Plaintiff also requests an extension of time to amend his complaint.

3

Good cause having been presented, the Court will grant Plaintiff an extension of time to file

4

an opposition to Defendants’ motion for summary judgment. However, Plaintiff’s motion for

5

extension of time to amend his complaint is denied. The deadline to amend the complaint was

6

February 17, 2012. Discovery and Scheduling Order, ECF No. 23. Plaintiff provides no good cause

7

to modify the deadline.

8

II.

August 3, 2012 Motion
Plaintiff requests that the Court provide a deadline to prepare an opposition to Defendants’

9
10

motion. Plaintiff contends that only prisoners with court deadlines have regular access to the law

11

library. Plaintiff contends that prison riots and other issues at Calipatria State Prison, where Plaintiff

12

is currently housed, have disrupted his access. As explained, the Court will grant Plaintiff an

13

extension of time to file an opposition to Defendants’ motion for summary judgment.

14

III.

August 6, 2012 Motion
Plaintiff requests that the Court defer consideration of Defendants’ motion for summary

15
16

judgment until he receives certain documents, namely 1) the Corcoran State Prison Hearings from

17

1998 and the policy and 2) training manuals regarding reporting sexual assault. By separate order,

18

the Court denied service of a subpoena as to the first request. As to the training manuals, CDCR, a

19

non-party, submitted a declaration that they produced these documents. ECF No. 83. Thus, it

20

appears that Plaintiff’s motion is moot.

21

IV.

22

September 10, 2012 Motion
Plaintiff requests an extension of time because the law library at Calipatria State Prison will

23

be closed for two weeks because of a staff vacation and staff shortage. Plaintiff does not specify for

24

what purpose he needs the extension of time. To the extent that Plaintiff requests an extension of

25

time to file his opposition to Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, the motion will be granted.

26

The Court notes that Plaintiff submitted his objections to Defendants’ statement of

27

undisputed facts on September 7, 2012. However, Plaintiff did not submit any other document. The

28

Court does not typically accept documents submitted over time. Plaintiff is to submit a whole
2

1

opposition. The Court also notes that Plaintiff received notice of the requirements to oppose a

2

motion for summary judgment from Defendants on July 18, 2012. ECF No. 71.

3

V.

Conclusion and Order

4

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motions for extension of

5

time to file an opposition to Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, filed July 5, 2012, August

6

3, 2012, August 6, 2012, and September 10, 2012, are granted as stated herein. Plaintiff is granted

7

thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order in which to file a complete opposition to

8

Defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Failure to timely file an opposition will result in waiver

9

of the opportunity to file an opposition. Defendants will be granted fifteen (15) days from the date

10

of service of Plaintiff’s opposition in which to file a reply, if any.

11
12

IT IS SO ORDERED.

13

Dated:

/s/ Dennis

September 28, 2012

L. Beck

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

14

DEAC_Signature-END:

15

3b142a

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3