Wilson v. Pierce et al

Filing 15

ORDER on Plaintiff's Notice, signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 7/7/17. Thirty Day Deadline. (Marrujo, C)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9

DENNIS WAYNE WILSON,

10
11
12
13

Case No. 1:16-cv-00479-LJO-SKO (PC)

Plaintiff,
ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE
v.
(Doc. 14)
PIERCE, et al.,
THIRTY DAY DEADLINE
Defendants.

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

Plaintiff, Dennis Wayne Wilson, was a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights
action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action was closed on April 4, 2017, on a finding that it
was barred by the statute of limitations as well as Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994) and
Edwards v. Balisok, 520 U.S. 641 (1997). (See Docs. 10-13.)
On July 5, 2017, Plaintiff filed a notice indicating that he did not receive the order to show
cause (Doc. 10) and findings and recommendation (Doc. 11) until June 26, 2017, as they had
apparently fallen behind the desk where letters are placed in the Los Angeles County Central Jail
where he was housed since August 22, 2016. (Doc. 14.) Plaintiff apologizes for not responding
to either of these orders and requests an opportunity to do so. (Id.)
Plaintiff’s lack of response to the dispositive findings in this case appears to have been

25
caused by circumstances beyond his control. Thus, his request to be given opportunity to respond
26
is reasonable. However, given that this action was dismissed based on statute of limitation
27
grounds and because it appears to raise claims that are barred by Heck and Edwards, judgment
28
1

1

will not be set aside at this time. Instead, Plaintiff may file a response addressing whether the

2

claims he raised in this action are barred by the statute of limitations and Heck and Edwards

3

which shall be considered under Rules 59 and 60 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

4

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that, within thirty (30) days of the date of

5

service of this order, Plaintiff may file a response to the order to show cause and the subsequent

6

orders that resulted in a dismissal of this action.

7
8
9
10

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

July 7, 2017

/s/

Sheila K. Oberto

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2

.