Torres v. Diaz et al
Filing
146
ORDER Regarding 145 Defendants' Request for Clarification and Striking Portion of May 23, 2016 Order Granting Plaintiff's Request to File a Reply to Defendants' Response to Plaintiff's Objections signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 6/6/2016. (Jessen, A)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
JUAN MATIAS TORRES,
12
Plaintiff,
13
14
v.
RALPH M. DIAZ, et al.,
15
Defendants.
16
Case No.: 1:14-cv-00492-DAD-SAB (PC)
ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ REQUEST
FOR CLARIFICATION AND STRIKING
PORTION OF MAY 23, 2016 ORDER GRANTING
PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST TO FILE A REPLY TO
DEFENDANTS’ RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S
OBJECTIONS
[ECF No. 145]
Plaintiff Juan Matias Torres is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action
17
18
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
On June 3, 2016, Defendants filed a request for clarification of the Court’s May 23, 2016,
19
20
order granting Plaintiff an extension of time to re-submit his objections to the pending findings and
21
recommendations and reply to Defendants’ response to Plaintiff’s objections. (ECF No. 142.)
On May 23, 2016, the Court granted Plaintiff’s request to submit amended objections and a
22
23
reply to Defendants’ response to Plaintiff’s objections, which were both separately filed on May 20,
24
2016. (ECF Nos. 139, 140, 141.) Inasmuch as the Court inadvertently granted Plaintiff’s request to
25
submit a reply (not authorized by the Local Rules) to Defendants’ response to their objections that
26
///
27
///
28
///
1
1
portion of the Court’s May 23, 2016, is stricken. Local Rule 304(b), (d). This ruling rightfully does
2
not foreclose the district judge’s consideration of Plaintiff’s reply to Defendants’ response to the
3
objections should justification for filing a reply be found.
4
5
IT IS SO ORDERED.
6
Dated:
7
June 6, 2016
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
8
9
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?