Hollis v. Downing et al

Filing 59

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 12/1/10 ORDERING that 54 Motion is partially granted. Plaintiffs oppositions are deemed timely filed. Plaintiff is not required to reserve the oppositions. Defendants motions stand submitted. Plaintiff shall file no further documents in connection with these pending motions. (Dillon, M)

(PC) Hollis v. Downing, et al

Doc. 59

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 vs. M.S. DOWNING, et al., Defendants. / Plaintiff has requested an extension of time to re-serve his oppositions on defendants and for the court to find his oppositions timely-filed under the mailbox rule. Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 270-72, 275 (1988). Plaintiff's oppositions were timely filed and defendants have received plaintiff's oppositions via CM/ECF electronic filing. Therefore, plaintiff is not required to re-serve the oppositions on defendants. Defendants' motions now stand submitted and plaintiff shall file no further documents in connection with these pending motions. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Plaintiff's November 15, 2010 motion is partially granted. 2. Plaintiff's oppositions are deemed timely filed. Plaintiff is not required to reserve the oppositions. 1
Dockets.Justia.com

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA MARVIN GLENN HOLLIS, Plaintiff, No. 2:09-cv-3431 FCD KJN P

ORDER

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
holl3431.eotd

3. Defendants' motions stand submitted. Plaintiff shall file no further documents in connection with these pending motions. DATED: December 1, 2010

_____________________________________ KENDALL J. NEWMAN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2