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)
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?