Brown v. Swan et al

Filing 48

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge John F. Moulds on 1/3/13 ORDERING that within 15 days from the date of this order plaintiff shall inform the court in writing whether he still seeks voluntary dismissal of this action or, instead, whether he wants to withdraw his September 10, 2012 motion for voluntary dismissal. Failure to respond to this order will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Plaintiffs November 9, 2012 motion for extension of time 43 is DENIED without prejudice. Plaintiffs November 21, 2012 motion for preliminary injunction and/or temporary restraining order 44 is DENIED without prejudice. Plaintiffs December 12, 2012 motion for temporary restraining order 45 is DENIED without prejudice.(Dillon, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

DEXTER BROWN,
Plaintiff,

11
vs.

12
13

No. 2:11-cv-2128 WBS JFM (PC)

CORRECTIONAL SERGEANT
D. SWAN, et al.,

ORDER

14
Defendants.
/

15

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to

16
17

42 U.S.C. § 1983. On September 10, 2012, plaintiff filed a motion to voluntarily dismiss this

18

action without prejudice and without “the assessment of a penalty/strike.” Motion to Voluntary

19

Recall/Dismiss this Civil Action, filed September 10, 2012, at 1. Therein, plaintiff represents

20

that he is seeking dismissal due to “unlawful and deliberate actions of CDCR officials” that

21

interfered with his ability to prosecute this action. Id. Plaintiff also states that he has “lost the

22

aid and logistical support of plaintiff’s peers in supporting this civil action . . . through the

23

unlawful and obstructionist abuses of discretion” of CDCR personnel and that he has a number

24

of chronic medical conditions that make it too difficult for him to prosecute this action in light of

25

the alleged obstructions. Id. at 1-2.

26

/////
1

1

On October 17, 2012, defendants filed a document styled “Defendants’ Non-

2

Opposition, In Part, and Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion to Voluntarily Dismiss.” Therein,

3

defendants represent that they do not oppose plaintiff’s motion to voluntarily dismiss this action

4

but they dispute plaintiff’s claim that CDCR officials have obstructed prosecution of this action.

5

Defendants also request dismissal of the action with prejudice.
On November 9, 2012, plaintiff filed a motion for an extension of time to respond

6
7

to defendants’ October 17, 2012 brief. On November 21, 2012, plaintiff filed a motion for

8

preliminary injunction or temporary restraining order, and on December 12, 2012, plaintiff filed a

9

motion for a temporary restraining order. It appears from the contentions in the latter motion that

10

plaintiff may no longer be seeking voluntary dismissal of this action. After review of the record,

11

and good cause appearing, plaintiff will be granted a period of fifteen days from the date of this

12

order to inform the court in writing whether he still seeks voluntary dismissal of this action or,

13

instead, whether he wants to withdraw his September 10, 2012 motion for voluntary dismissal.

14

Failure to respond to this order will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed

15

without prejudice. All outstanding motions will be denied without prejudice to their renewal, as

16

appropriate, following plaintiff’s response to this order.

17

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

18

1. Within fifteen days from the date of this order plaintiff shall inform the court

19

in writing whether he still seeks voluntary dismissal of this action or, instead, whether he wants

20

to withdraw his September 10, 2012 motion for voluntary dismissal. Failure to respond to this

21

order will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed without prejudice.
2. Plaintiff’s November 9, 2012 motion for extension of time (Doc. No. 43) is

22
23

denied without prejudice.
3. Plaintiff’s November 21, 2012 motion for preliminary injunction and/or

24
25

temporary restraining order (Doc. No. 44) is denied without prejudice.

26

/////
2

4. Plaintiff’s December 12, 2012 motion for temporary restraining order (Doc.

1
2

No. 45) is denied without prejudice.

3

DATED: January 3, 2013.

4
5
6
7
8

12
brow2128.o3

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
3