West v. Dickinson

Filing 37

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 9/19/10 ORDERING that the 9/14/10 motion "to order respondent to furnish his legal property" 36 is denied without prejudice. (Becknal, R)

(HC)West v. Dickinson

Doc. 37

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 The court notes that petitioner's opposition, if any, to respondent's September 9, 2010 motion to dismiss is due to be filed by October 9, 2010. In the event that petitioner is seeking additional time to file his opposition to that motion based upon an alleged lack of access to his legal materials, he is advised to file a motion for an extension of time specifically stating the grounds for that motion. 1
Dockets.Justia.com
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA MACK A WEST, JR., Petitioner, vs. KATHLEEN DICKINSON, Warden, Respondent. / On September 14, 2010, petitioner filed a motion seeking an order from the court requiring "respondent to furnish his legal property." However, in his motion, petitioner fails to clearly explain what property he is allegedly missing, where his property might be held, or whether he has tried to resolve this matter through the normal prison administrative grievance process. The court will therefore deny petitioner's motion without prejudice. Plaintiff may refile his motion if his requests for administrative relief prove to be unfruitful.1 ///// ORDER No. CIV S-09-3147 FCD DAD P

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
DAD:sj west3147.mot(2)

Accordingly, for the reasons set forth above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's September 14, 2010 motion "to order respondent to furnish his legal property" (Doc. No. 36) is denied without prejudice. DATED: September 19, 2010.

2