Pullett v. Cabrera et al

Filing 18

ORDER GRANTING Motion for Extension of Time to File Objections 17 ; ORDER DENYING Motion for Court Order Directing Prison Officials; THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE to File Objections to Findings and Recommendations, signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 7/2/13. (Hellings, J)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

DELL PULLETT,

11
12
13
14

1:10-cv-02028-AWI-GSA-PC

Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR
EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE
OBJECTIONS
(Doc. 17.)

vs.
A. CABRERA, et al.,

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR COURT
ORDER DIRECTING PRISON OFFICIALS

Defendants.

15

THIRTY DAY DEADLINE TO FILE
OBJECTIONS TO FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS

16
17
18

Dell Pullett ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with

19

this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed the Complaint commencing

20

this action on October 29, 2010. (Doc. 1.)

21

On July 1, 2013, Plaintiff filed a motion for an extension of time to file objections to the

22

Magistrate Judge’s findings and recommendations.

23

Plaintiff’s motion for extension of time shall be granted.

24

(Doc. 17.)

Good cause appearing,

Plaintiff also requests a court order directing prison officials at Corcoran State Prison

25

(CSP) to return his legal property to him. Id. Plaintiff asserts that his personal property should

26

have been given to him thirty days ago. Plaintiff argues that he cannot prosecute this case

27

without his legal property and other personal property. The Court lacks jurisdiction to issue an

28

order requiring prison officials to give Plaintiff his property, because the Court does not have
1

1

such a case or controversy before it in this action. See Zepeda v. United States Immigration

2

Service, 753 F.2d 719, 727 (9th Cir. 1985); City of Los Angeles v. Lyons, 461 U.S. 95, 102,

3

103 S.Ct. 1660, 1665 (1983); Valley Forge Christian Coll. v. Ams. United for Separation of

4

Church and State, Inc., 454 U.S. 464, 471, 102 S.Ct. 752, 757-58 (1982). Plaintiff’s case

5

concerns claims of inadequate medical care and retaliation against him when he was

6

incarcerated at Kern Valley State Prison. Plaintiff is now housed at CSP, and an order directing

7

prison officials at CSP to act would not remedy any of the claims upon which this action

8

proceeds. Therefore, Plaintiff=s motion for a court order directing prison officials to return his

9

property must be denied.

10

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

11

1.

12

to file objections to the findings and recommendations issues on May 14, 2013; and

13
14

Plaintiff is GRANTED thirty days from the date of service of this order in which

2.

Plaintiff’s motion for a court order directing prison officials to return his

property to him is DENIED.

15
16
17
18

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

19
20
21

July 2, 2013

/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

DEAC_Signature-END:

6i0kij8d

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2