Williams v. Htay et al

Filing 16

ORDER GRANTING Plaintiff's Request for Extension of Time to File Second Response to the order to Show Cause, signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 11/30/16. (Show Cause Response due :30-Day Deadline)(Martin-Gill, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12
13
14

Case No. 1:15-cv-01026-EPG (PC)

JOHN ERIC WILLIAMS,

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S
REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME
(ECF NO. 15)

Plaintiff,
v.
DR. HTAY AND DR. E. CLARK,

15

THIRTY DAY DEADLINE

Defendants.

16
17
18

Plaintiff John Eric Williams, also known as Michael John Coleman (“Plaintiff”), is

19

proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §

20

1983. Plaintiff filed the Complaint commencing this action on July 6, 2015. (ECF No. 1). In

21

Plaintiff’s Complaint, Plaintiff claims that he is not receiving a pain medication, specifically

22

Gabapentin.

23

Plaintiff’s Complaint also states that there are administrative remedies available to him,

24

but that he has not completed the administrative remedies process. (Id. at p. 2). The California

25

prison system provides for three levels of appellate review. Cal. Code Regs. tit. 15, § 3084.1.

26

Plaintiff went through the first and second level of review, but did not appeal to the third level.

27

(Id. at p. 5). The reason Plaintiff filed this lawsuit before appealing to the third level is because

28

Plaintiff was “in pain mentally and physically and spiritually [Plaintiff is] suffering nobody to
1

1

turn to but the courts for relief.” (Id.). Therefore, on October 21, 2016, the Court issued an

2

order for Plaintiff to show cause why his case should not be dismissed for failure to exhaust

3

administrative remedies. (ECF No. 14).

4

On November 28, 2016, Plaintiff filed a response to the order to show cause. (ECF No.

5

15). Plaintiff states that he has exhausted his administrative remedies, and requests a 30 day

6

extension of time so that he can show the Court that he has exhausted his administrative

7

remedies.

8

Because it appears that the extension of time is warranted, it is ORDERED that Plaintiff

9

has 30 days from the date of the service of this order to file a second response to the order to

10

show cause. Failure to respond will result in dismissal of the case.

11
12
13

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

November 30, 2016

/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2