Jeremy Jones v. Chen et al

Filing 58

ORDER Granting In Part Motion For Extension Of Time (ECF No. 57 ), February 16, 2015 Deadline, signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 2/6/2015. (Fahrney, E)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 JEREMY JONES, 11 12 13 Plaintiff, CASE NO. 1:11-cv-01762-MJS (PC) ORDER GRANTING IN PART MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME v. (ECF No. 57) DR. CHEN, FEBRUARY 16, 2015 DEADLINE 14 Defendant. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The action proceeds against Defendant Chen on Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment inadequate medical care claim. (ECF No. 22.) Defendant seeks an extension of time to February 19, 2015 to file his pretrial statement on the grounds that Plaintiff received an extension of time and defense counsel has other deadlines in other cases. (ECF No. 57.) Although the details of defense counsel’s deadlines were not provided to the Court, the Court will assume that such deadlines provide good cause for a limited extension of time. At the same time, however, the Court requires adequate time to prepare for the February 26, 2015 telephonic trial confirmation hearing, and is unwilling to postpone the hearing because 27 28 1 1 defense counsel is unable to timely prepare a pretrial statement due to vague and 2 unspecified deadlines in other cases. 3 Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant’s request for extension of 4 time (ECF No. 57) is GRANTED IN PART. Defendant’s time to file a pretrial statement is 5 hereby extended to February 16, 2015. 6 7 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: February 6, 2015 /s/ 9 Michael J. Seng UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?