Lillian Smith v. Burgdorff et al

Filing 8

ORDER Granting 4 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response to Complaint signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 08/26/2017. (Flores, E)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 LILLIAN SMITH, 12 13 Plaintiff, vs. 14 C. BURGDORFF, et al., 15 1:17-cv-00634-GSA-PC ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE RESPONSE TO COMPLAINT Defendants. (ECF No. 4.) 16 17 This is a civil action filed by Lillian Smith (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro 18 se. This action was initiated by civil complaint filed by Plaintiff in the Madera County 19 Superior Court on November 18, 2016 (Case #MCV073193). On May 17, 2017, defendants C. 20 Burgdorff, J. Harry, E. Olesky, and B. Wilkins (“Defendants”) removed the case to federal 21 court by filing a Notice of Removal of Action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a). (ECF No. 1.) 22 On May 17, 2017, Defendants filed a motion for an extension of time to file their response to 23 Plaintiff’s complaint. (ECF No. 4.) 24 The court is required to screen complaints in civil actions in which a prisoner seeks 25 redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. 26 § 1915A(a). 27 Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) at the Central California Women’s 28 Facility in Chowchilla, California, violated her rights. Because Plaintiff is a prisoner and Plaintiff’s complaint alleges that Defendants, employees of the California 1 1 Defendants were employees of the CDCR at a state prison when the alleged events occurred, 2 the court is required to screen the complaint. 3 Defendants request the court to allow them an extension of time to file their response to 4 Plaintiff’s complaint, until thirty days after the court’s screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, if the 5 complaint survives the screening. Good cause appearing, Defendants’ motion shall be granted. 6 Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 7 1. The court shall issue a screening order in due time; and 8 2. Defendants are GRANTED an extension of time to file their response to Plaintiff’s complaint, until thirty days from the date of service of the court’s 9 10 screening order, if the complaint survives the screening. 11 12 13 14 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: August 26, 2017 /s/ Gary S. Austin UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 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?