Quair v. Gertz
Filing
60
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 5/10/13 ORDERING that plaintiff is granted 14 days after service of this order to file objections to the March 8, 2013 findings and recommendations. No further extensions will be granted; and Plaintiffs motion for various relief 59 is otherwise denied.(Dillon, M)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
SAMMY R. QUAIR, SR.,
11
Plaintiff,
Defendant.
12
13
No. 2:11-cv-2293 JAM CKD P
ORDER
vs.
GERTZ,
14
15
/
16
On March 8, 2013, this court issued findings and recommendations that
17
defendant’s motion for summary judgment be granted and this case closed. (ECF No. 55.) On
18
April 9, 2013, plaintiff was granted a fourteen-day extension of time to file objections to the
19
findings and recommendations. (ECF No. 57.) Plaintiff did not file objections within that
20
period.
21
On April 29, 2013, plaintiff filed a motion seeking various relief, including an
22
extension of time to file an opposition to summary judgment. (ECF No. 59 at 2.) The time for
23
any such filing has passed. Plaintiff was given ample time to oppose summary judgment, and
24
eventually filed documents and evidence which the court, in the absence of any other briefing by
25
plaintiff, construed as plaintiff’s opposition. (See ECF Nos. 54, 55.) However, plaintiff will be
26
granted a final, fourteen-day extension of time to file objections to the March 8, 2013 findings
1
1
and recommendations.
2
Plaintiff also requests that this court order the Clerk of Court to make copies of
3
his motion and exhibits to submit to the magistrate judge in another pending action in this
4
district. This is not an efficient use of judicial resources. However, plaintiff may ask the
5
magistrate judge in the other action to take judicial notice of documents filed in this action.
6
Plaintiff further asserts that the Kings County Jail has an inadequate law library
7
and that he is unable to get photocopies or printouts of any legal material. He seeks a court order
8
directing the jail to provide inmates with photocopying and printing of legal material, access to
9
the law library three times a week, law books to read in their cells, non-collect phone calls for
10
legal matters, a local telephone book, and office supplies.
11
In Bounds v. Smith, 430 US 817, 828 (1977), the court held that “the fundamental
12
constitutional right of access to the courts requires . . . providing prisoners with adequate law
13
libraries or adequate assistance from persons trained in the law.” A court may order increased
14
access to the library only if a prisoner’s current access is so deficient as to deprive him his
15
fundamental right of access to the courts. Lindquist v. Idaho State Board of Corrections, 776
16
F.2d 851, 858 (9th Cir. 1985). Here, plaintiff has not alleged a deprivation of his fundamental
17
right of access to the courts, nor explained why the alleged conditions prevent him from drafting
18
objections to the findings and recommendations.
19
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
20
1. Plaintiff is granted fourteen days after service of this order to file objections to
21
the March 8, 2013 findings and recommendations. No further extensions will be granted; and
22
23
2. Plaintiff’s motion for various relief (ECF No. 59) is otherwise denied.
Dated: May 10, 2013
24
_____________________________________
CAROLYN K. DELANEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
25
26
2 / quai2293.ord2
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?