Bullock v. Wasco State Prison Medical

Filing 96

ORDER denying 95 Motion for Extension of Time signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 4/6/2018. (Lundstrom, T)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

GORDON BULLOCK,
Plaintiff,

12
13

Case No. 1:14-cv-00092-DAD-EPG (PC)
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME

v.
(ECF Nos. 95)

14

BROCK SHEELA, et al.,
Defendants.

15
16
17

Gordon Bullock (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis

18

in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff commenced this action by the

19

filing of a Complaint on December 24, 2013. (ECF No. 1.) This action is now proceeding on

20

Plaintiff’s Fourth Amended Complaint against Brock Sheela and C. Rios (“Defendants”). (ECF

21

No. 26.)

22

On July 27, 2017, Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment for failure to exhaust

23

available administrative remedies. (ECF No. 62). On August 7, 2017, Plaintiff filed an

24

opposition to the motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 66). On August 15, 2017, Defendants

25

filed their reply. (ECF No. 67). On August 31, 2017, Plaintiff filed a sur-reply. (ECF No. 69).

26

On January 16, 2018, Plaintiff moved for summary judgment, arguing that Defendants

27

have admitted issues of material fact. (ECF No. 78). Defendants filed an opposition to the motion

28

on February 6, 2018. (ECF No. 81).
1

1

On March 1, 2018, the Court issued findings and recommendations to the assigned district

2

judge, recommending that Defendants’ motion for summary judgment be denied in part and

3

granted in part, and that Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment be denied. (ECF No. 85).

4

Defendants filed their objections to the findings and recommendations on March 21, 2018, and

5

Plaintiff filed his objections on March 22, 2018. (ECF Nos. 88, 89). The findings and

6

recommendations were adopted in full on March 28, 2018. (ECF No. 91).

7

On February 23, 2018, Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment on the merits.

8

(ECF No. 83). On March 23, 2018, Plaintiff filed his opposition to the motion for summary

9

judgment. (ECF No. 90). On March 30, 2018, Defendants filed their reply. (ECF No. 93).

10

On April 5, 2018, Plaintiff filed the instant motion for an extension of time. (ECF No. 95).

11

Plaintiff requests an extension of time to oppose the motion for summary judgment on the merits,

12

(ECF No. 83), and to object to the findings and recommendations, (ECF No. 85). Id. Plaintiff

13

contends that he requires an extension of time because he was placed in “the hole” without access

14

to the law library and is very sick. Id.

15

Plaintiff’s motion is, however, moot. Plaintiff has filed his respective opposition and

16

objections. (ECF Nos. 89, 90). And, all pending motions are now fully briefed and submitted.

17

See Local Rule 230(l). Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion is denied.

18
19
20

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

April 6, 2018

/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2