Caver v. Gomez et al

Filing 83

ORDER Denying Plaintiff's Motion For Extension Of Time To File Objections As Premature (Doc. 79 ), signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 2/19/2015. (Fahrney, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

DENELL CAVER,
Plaintiff,

11
12

v.

13

E. GOMEZ, et al.,

14

Case No. 1:11-cv-01025-AWI-SKO (PC)
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE
OBJECTIONS AS PREMATURE
(Doc. 79)

Defendants.
_____________________________________/

15
16

Plaintiff Denell Caver (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

17 pauperis, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on June 20, 2011. This action
18 is proceeding on Plaintiff’s second amended complaint, filed on April 10, 2012, against
19 Defendants Gomez, Stark, and Garcia (“Defendants”) for acting with deliberate indifference to
20 Plaintiff’s safety, in violation of the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution.
21

On February 13, 2015, Plaintiff filed a motion notifying the Court of delays in receiving

22 mail and requesting a thirty-day extension of time to file objections to the future findings and
23 recommendations addressing Defendants’ motion for summary judgment. The Court is aware of
24 the delays inherent in service by mail, which are compounded by the institutional setting. For this
25 reason, parties are generally given twenty or thirty days to file objections in cases such as this. If
26 Plaintiff needs an extension of time to file objections once findings and recommendations are
27 issued, he may file a motion at that time.
28

1

Plaintiff’s present motion is premature and it is HEREBY DENIED, without prejudice, on

2 that ground.
3
4
5

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

February 19, 2015

/s/ Sheila K. Oberto
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2