Lear v. Biter et al

Filing 56

ORDER denying 49 Motion signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 3/30/2018. (Lundstrom, T)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

RODERICK WILLIAM LEAR,

9
10
11
12

Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 1:15-cv-01903-DAD-MJS (PC)
ORDER DENYING MOTION
(ECF NO. 49)

MARTIN BITER, et al.,
Defendants.

13
14
15
16

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil

17

rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The action proceeds against

18

Defendants Akanno and Palomino on Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claims for

19

inadequate medical care.

20

Before the Court is Plaintiff’s December 28, 2017 “Motion to Request Court Allow

21

Plaintiff Time to Respond to All Defendants Motions.” (ECF No. 49.) The motion arises

22

out of the Court having granting Defendants’ motion for a relatively brief extension of

23

time in which to file a motion for summary judgment on exhaustion grounds. (ECF No.

24

45.) Given a clear showing of good cause, the Court granted the motion without awaiting

25

Plaintiff’s opposition.

26
27
28

1

Plaintiff appears to construe the Court’s order as favoring Defendants, cutting off

2

Plaintiff’s opportunity to respond to the motion for summary judgment, and punishing

3

Plaintiff for proceeding pro se.

4

The Court regularly grants ex parte requests to both sides to extend time,

5

particularly where, as here, the extension is brief and there is no apparent prejudice to

6

the opposing party. Local Rule 144(d). Plaintiff presents no cause why the motion should

7

not have been granted. He will have an opportunity to respond to the motion on the

8

merits. The Court does not, and will not, issue substantive rulings without affording

9

Plaintiff an opportunity to respond.

10

Plaintiff’s motion “Motion to Request Court Allow Plaintiff Time to Respond to All

11

Defendants Motions” is HEREBY DENIED. To the extent Plaintiff requires additional

12

time to respond to specific motions or orders he may file a motion for extension of time.

13
14
15

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

March 30, 2018

/s/

16

Michael J. Seng

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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