Griffin v. Johnson et al

Filing 172

ORDER Denying Motion for 30-Day Extension of Time to Object to Findings and Recommendations re 171 , signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 9/29/17. (Gonzalez, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

MATTHEW JAMES GRIFFIN,

12
13
14
15

Plaintiff,
v.
A. JOHNSON, et al.,

Case No. 1:13-cv-01599-LJO-BAM (PC)
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR 30-DAY
EXTENSION OF TIME TO OBJECT TO
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
(ECF No. 171)

Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff Matthew James Griffin (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in

18

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

19

Plaintiff’s claims of excessive force and deliberate indifference to serious medical needs in

20

violation of the Eighth Amendment against Defendants Johnson, Gonzales, Valdez, Munoz,

21

Sexton, Ross, Thor, Doe, Kul, Busch, Bell, and Smith.

22

On September 11, 2017, the Court issued findings and recommendations recommending

23

that Defendant Daniel Gonzales’ motion for summary judgment or partial summary judgment be

24

granted in part and denied in part, (ECF No. 169), and that Defendant Busch’s motion for

25

summary judgment or partial summary judgment be granted in part and denied in part, (ECF No.

26

170). Those findings and recommendations were served on Plaintiff and contained notice that

27

any objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen (14) days after service. (ECF No. 169, p.

28

14; ECF No. 170, p. 11.)
1

1

Currently before the Court is a certificate of service filed on September 25, 2017. The

2

certificate of service states that on September 20, 2017, Plaintiff delivered to prison officials for

3

mailing: Plaintiff’s First Motion for 30-day Extension of time to Object to the Findings &

4

Recommendations Granting Partial Summary Judgment to Defendant Gonzales (doc. 169) and

5

Busch (doc. 170); and a Supporting Declaration. (ECF No. 171.) Although the certificate of

6

service references these filings, no other documents were attached or received. Thus, the Court

7

construes the certificate of service as a motion for extension of time to file objections to the

8

findings and recommendations.

9
10
11

Plaintiff has not shown good cause, or any cause, for the requested extension of time.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4).
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for a 30-day extension of

12

time to object to the findings and recommendations granting partial summary judgment, (ECF

13

No. 171), is DENIED without prejudice. Plaintiff’s objections remain due on or before

14

September 28, 2017.

15
16
17

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Barbara

September 29, 2017

A. McAuliffe

_

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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