Bradford v. Marchak

Filing 33

ORDER Regarding Plaintiff's Opposition to Defendants' Request for an Extension of Time to Respond to Complaint 32 , signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 08/30/17. (Martin-Gill, S)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 RAYMOND ALFORD BRADFORD, 7 Plaintiff, 8 9 v. M. MARCHAK, et al., 10 Defendants. 11 12 13 14 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No.: 1:14-cv-01689-LJO-BAM (PC) ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT (ECF No. 32) Plaintiff Raymond Alford Bradford is a state prisoner proceeding se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s opposition to Defendant Grenwal’s request for an 15 extension of time to respond to the second amended complaint. (ECF No. 32.) As the Court has 16 granted Defendant Grenwal’s request, the Court construes this opposition as an objection to that order. 17 Plaintiff vaguely asserts that he will be prejudiced by the extension of time. The Court finds no 18 19 prejudice to Plaintiff in the brief extension which was granted to Defendant upon good cause shown. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s opposition, construed as an objection to the order granting Defendant’s 20 request for an extension of time to respond to the second amended complaint, is HEREBY 21 OVERRULED. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: August 30, 2017 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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?