(PC) Roberts v. Newsom et al

Filing 51

ORDER GRANTING Defendants Covert and Parra's 50 Ex Parte Application to Extend Time within which to File Responsive Pleading signed by Magistrate Judge Christopher D. Baker on 03/10/2025. Responsive Pleading due April 1, 2025. (Deputy Clerk EF)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

PAUL ROBERTS,

12

Plaintiff,

13

v.

14

GAVIN NEWSOM, et al.,

15

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS
COVERT AND PARRA’S EX PARTE
APPLICATION TO EXTEND TIME
WITHIN WHICH TO FILE RESPONSIVE
PLEADING

Defendants.
(Doc. 50)

16
17
18

Case No. 1:21-cv-00506-KES-CDB (PC)

Paul Roberts is proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. section
1983.

19

I.

20

Following service of Plaintiff’s first amended complaint on Defendants Covert and Parra,

RELEVANT PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND1

21

Defendants Covert and Parra waived personal service, and a responsive pleading was due to be

22

filed no later than March 4, 2025. (Doc. 49.)

23

On March 3, 2025, Defendants Covert and Parra filed an ex parte application, seeking a

24

28-day extension of time within which to file their responsive pleading. (Doc. 50.)

25

///

26
27
28

1

Defendants CIM Warden, Delgadillo, Farooq, Gilman, Gonzales, Lemus, Pilkerton, and Torres have already
appeared in this action. (Doc. 34.) The undersigned issued Findings and Recommendations to Grant in Part and Deny
in Part Defendants’ Motion to Partially Dismiss Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint on August 12, 2024. (Doc. 40.)
Those findings remain pending determination before the assigned District Judge.

1

II.

DISCUSSION

2

Defendants Covert and Parra request an extension of 28-days within which to file a

3

responsive pleading. (Doc. 50 at 3.) Defense counsel declares he received Parra’s request for

4

representation on January 21, 2025, and Covert’s request on January 26, 2025. (Id. at 5, ¶ 2.)

5

Counsel declares that due to the “press of business,” he has been unable to prepare, file, and serve

6

a responsive pleading. (Id., ¶ 3 [detailing multiple assignments and related filings].) Defense

7

counsel filed the application ex parte because Plaintiff is a parolee and represents himself. (Id., ¶

8

4.) Further, counsel does not believe Plaintiff would be prejudiced by the requested extension of

9

time and Plaintiff advised counsel by telephone on March 2, 2025, that he did not oppose the

10

extension. (Id.) Defendants Covert and Parra have not sought a previous extension of the filing

11

deadline. (Id., ¶ 5.)

12

III.

13

Accordingly, and for good cause shown, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

14

1. Defendants’ request for an extension of time within which to file a responsive

15
16

pleading (Doc. 50) is GRANTED; and
2. Defendants Covert and Parra SHALL file a responsive pleading no later than April

17
18
19
20

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

1, 2025.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

March 10, 2025

___________________

_

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2