(PC) Lewis v. Quinto et al

Filing 63

ORDER GRANTING 62 Defendants' Second Motion for Administrative Relief Extending Time to Respond to Plaintiff's Filings, signed by Magistrate Judge Christopher D. Baker on 01/08/2025. Filing Deadline: 1/15/2025. (Deputy Clerk CM)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

KEVIN LEWIS, JR.,

12

Plaintiff,

13

v.

14

ALAN QUINTO, et al.,

15

Defendants.

Case No.: 1:22-cv-00628-CDB (PC)
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’
SECOND MOTION FOR
ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF EXTENDING
TIME TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S
FILINGS
(Doc. 62)

16
17

Plaintiff Kevin Lewis, Jr. (“Plaintiff”) is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this

18

civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action proceeds against Defendants Alan

19

Guinto,1 Bobby Gilbert, and Shannon Brown (collectively, “Defendants”) for violations of

20

Plaintiff’s constitutional rights.

21

I.

INTRODUCTION

22

On May 18, 2022, Plaintiff initiated this action with the filing of a complaint. (Doc. 1). On

23

March 29, 2024, the Court issued is Discovery and Scheduling Order. (Doc. 51). Therein, the Court

24

set the deadline for filing all dispositive motions (other than a motion for summary judgment to

25

exhaust, which was due July 29, 2024) to February 6, 2025. (Id. ¶ 9). On November 18, 2024,

26
The Court notes that Defendant Alan Guinto may have been misspelled or misidentified as “Alan
Quinto” on the docket. Plaintiff raises the misspelling of Defendant Guinto’s name in his motions
for summary judgment. (Doc. 56, 57). Defendants identify “Guinto” in their administrative
motions for relief. (Docs. 59 at 1, 62 at 1).
1

27
28

1

Plaintiff filed a one-page document entitled “Motion for Summary Judgment.” (Doc. 56). Plaintiff

2

filed a second, one-page document also entitled “Motion for Summary Judgment” on November

3

25, 2024. (Doc. 57).

4

On December 6, 2024, Defendants filed their first administrative motion requesting an

5

extension of time to respond to Plaintiff’s filings by 30 days up to and including January 8, 2025.

6

(Doc. 59). On December 13, 2024, the Court granted the administrative motion for good cause.

7

(Doc. 60).

8

Pending before the Court is Defendants’ second administrative motion requesting a 7-day

9

extension of time to respond to Plaintiff’s filings, up to and including January 15, 2025. (Doc. 62).

10

II.

DISCUSSION

11

Counsel for Defendants represents that despite due diligence, he has been unable to

12

complete and file a responsive pleading by the current deadline. (Id. at 1). In support of the

13

requested brief extension, Counsel for Defendants notes that prior to discovery, Plaintiff filed

14

premature motions for summary judgment and motions for default in this case. (Id. at 3, ¶ 2); see

15

(Docs. 13, 14, 16, 33). These motions were denied by the Court. (Doc. 62 at 3, ¶ 2); see (Docs.

16

19, 39). Plaintiff thereafter filed two documents labeled “Motion for Summary Judgment” on

17

November 18, 2024, and November 25, 2024. (Doc. 62 at 3, ¶ 2); see (Docs. 56, 57).

18

Counsel for Defendants declares he has been diligently litigating this case as he has taken

19

Plaintiff’s deposition, propounded discovery, and responded to discovery requests. (Doc. 62 at 3,

20

¶ 3). Counsel for Defendants declares he is in the process of completing a response to Plaintiff’s

21

pending filings (Docs. 56, 57), including reviewing all prior filings, underlying records, documents

22

uncovered through discovery, interviewing witnesses, and drafting a response. (Id.). Counsel

23

declares that despite originally thinking the prior extension sufficient to complete the response, and

24

due to unforeseen risks to which he had to respond, and his recent assignment to an upcoming trial,

25

he is unable to complete a response by the current deadline. (Id. at ¶ 4). Counsel declares that he

26

has been inundated attending to this and many other deadlines in other cases, such as discovery,

27

motions practice, and various pretrial responsibilities. (Id.). Counsel declares he was also out of

28

the office during the holidays for pre-planned vacation time. (Id.). Counsel declares that this
2

1

request is not brought for any improper purpose, or to delay or harass Plaintiff in the prosecution

2

of this action. (Id. at ¶ 5). Counsel declares that he does not believe the requested extension will

3

significantly impact the progress of this case or unfairly prejudice Plaintiff, and Defendants’

4

opposition will be filed significantly in advance of the dispositive motion and discovery deadlines,

5

and there is trial date currently set in the matter. (Id.). Counsel further declares that to his

6

knowledge, Plaintiff has no direct telephone number or e-mail address because he is incarcerated,

7

which makes same-day delivery and immediate notice of the instant motion impracticable. (Id. at

8

¶ 6). Counsel declares that he is mailing Plaintiff a copy of this motion and attached declaration

9

via First-Claim U.S. Mail. (Id.).

10

Here, Defendants have established good cause for a final, brief extension to respond to

11

Plaintiff’s filings for 7 days, up to and including January15, 2025. The Court finds a response by

12

Plaintiff to be unnecessary. (See L.R. 233(b)).

13

III.

14

Accordingly, and for good cause shown, the Court ORDERS that Defendants’ second

15

motion for administrative relief (Doc. 62) is GRANTED, and Defendants have up to and including

16

January 15, 2025, to file a response to Plaintiff’s filings (Docs. 56, 57).

17

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

No further requests for extensions will be entertained by the Court absent a showing of

18

extraordinary circumstances.

19

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20
21

Dated:

January 8, 2025

___________________

_

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3