Garraway v. Ciufo et al

Filing 40

ORDER GRANTING Defendants' 37 Request for Extension of Time to Respond to Motion to Compel, signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 2/25/19. Response due by 2/27/2019. (Marrujo, C)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MITCHELL GARRAWAY, 12 13 14 15 Plaintiff, vs. JACQUILINE CIUFO, et al., 1:17-cv-00533-DAD-GSA-PC ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO MOTION TO COMPEL (ECF No. 37.) Defendants. DEADLINE: FEBRUARY 27, 2019 16 17 18 19 Mitchell Garraway (“Plaintiff”) is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 20 pauperis with this civil rights action pursuant to Bivens vs. Six Unknown Agents, 403 U.S. 388 21 (1971). This case now proceeds with Plaintiff’s original Complaint filed on April 17, 2017, 22 against defendants Jacquiline Ciufo (Unit Manager), Corrections Officer K. Miller, and 23 Lieutenant J. Zaragoza (collectively, “Defendants”), for failure to protect Plaintiff under the 24 Eighth Amendment. 25 On January 29, 2019, Defendants filed a request for extension of time until February 27, 26 2019, to respond to the motion to compel production of documents filed by Plaintiff on January 27 17, 2019. (ECF No. 36.) Plaintiff has not filed an opposition to the request, and the time for 28 filing an opposition has expired. Local Rule 230(l). 1 1 2 3 Good cause having been shown, and GOOD CAUSE APPEARING THEREFOR, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 1. 4 5 Defendants’ request for extension of time, filed on January 29, 2019, is GRANTED; and 2. 6 Defendants are granted until February 27, 2019, to file a response to the motion to compel production of documents filed by Plaintiff on January 17, 2019. 7 8 9 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: February 25, 2019 /s/ Gary S. Austin UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 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?