Manning, et al., v. CDCR, et al.,

Filing 284

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 7/28/2015. Plaintiff's 270 273 282 Requests for Extension of Time are GRANTED in part. Plaintiff shall have until 8/27/2015 to submit documents in support of response to defendants' [ 257] 258 Motion for Summary Judgment. Any documents plaintiff seeks to submit must be filed as a single filing. Plaintiff's various 278 279 280 281 filings regarding actions of CDCR employees will be DISREGARDED. Within 10 days of filing of Order, defendants shall advise Court whether they believe a Settlement Conference in case would be beneficial at this stage. (Marciel, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

SHERMAN D. MANNING,

12
13
14
15
16

No. 2:12-cv-2440 MCE AC P

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS AND
REHABILITATION, et al.,
Defendants.

17
18

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42

19

U.S.C. § 1983. Currently before the court are plaintiff’s motion for a sixty-day extension of time

20

(ECF No. 270); motion for access to his legal property (ECF No. 273); motion for additional time

21

to provide supporting documentation (ECF No. 282); and various notices regarding the alleged

22

treatment of and threats against plaintiff by correctional staff and other miscellaneous issues and

23

requests (ECF Nos. 275, 278, 279, 280, 281).

24

The court will do its best to address the matters before it; however, this task is made

25

difficult by plaintiff’s continued insistence on filing duplicative, piecemeal documents that lack a

26

caption designating the nature of the document or the relief sought. Plaintiff has been advised on

27

numerous occasions that his piecemeal and duplicative filings constitute a burden on this court

28

and make it impossible to respond to every issue contained in the filings. See ECF Nos. 127, 131,
1

1

146, 222. Plaintiff has also been warned that continuing to submit such filings would result in the

2

filings being disregarded. Id. The court will therefore address only plaintiff’s most obvious

3

issues.

4

I.

5

Requests for Extension of Time
Plaintiff’s motion for a sixty-day extension of time (ECF No. 270), motion for access to

6

his legal property (ECF No. 273), and motion for additional time to provide supporting

7

documentation (ECF No. 282) all essentially seek additional time to respond to defendants’

8

motions for summary judgment.

9

In his motion for a sixty-day extension of time, plaintiff seeks a general extension of time

10

to respond to anything filed after May 15, 2015.1 ECF No. 270. He also specifically requests an

11

additional sixty days to respond to the re-served motions for summary judgment. Id. Five days

12

after the Clerk of the Court filed the motion for extension, plaintiff’s first response to defendants’

13

motions for summary judgment was filed. ECF No. 271. Plaintiff has since proceeded to file two

14

additional responses to the motions for summary judgment (ECF Nos. 274, 281) and one of his

15

miscellaneous filings also appears to contain a partial response to the motions for summary

16

judgment (ECF No. 275).

17

In his motion for access to his legal property, plaintiff seeks an order directing that he be

18

given access to his legal property so that he can respond to the motions for summary judgment.

19

ECF No. 273. The court construes this motion as a request for additional time to provide

20

supporting documentation for his responses to the motions for summary judgment. Plaintiff has

21

also filed a motion specifically requesting a deadline by which he must provide supporting

22

documentation. ECF No. 282. Typically, supporting documentation must be submitted with the

23

response to the motion for summary judgment. However, in light of plaintiff’s claims that he has

24

not had access to his documents, the court will grant plaintiff’s motions and set a date by which

25

he must submit any documents supporting his response to defendants’ motions for summary

26

1

27
28

He alleges that he needs a general extension because he has not received any orders from the
court since the May 15, 2015 order (ECF No. 252) and requests the court send him copies of any
subsequently issued orders. ECF No. 270. Plaintiff has since notified the court that he has
received the orders issued by the court after May 15, 2015. ECF No. 275 at 9-10.
2

1

judgment. Defendants’ current deadline to file their replies is vacated and their time to reply will

2

not begin to run until after plaintiff has filed his supporting documentation or his time to do so

3

has passed.

4

Plaintiff is advised that any supplemental response included with his supporting

5

documentation must be limited to explaining how the produced documents support his response

6

or create a material issue of fact. Plaintiff has already filed three responses and this is not an

7

opportunity to repeat arguments that have already been made. Plaintiff’s supporting documents

8

must be submitted to the court as a single filing and plaintiff shall not pepper the court with

9

multiple, additional filings of documents, nor shall he continue to inundate the court with

10

multiple, supplemental responses to the motions for summary judgment. Plaintiff is also advised

11

that once defendants have filed their replies, he is not to file a sur-reply unless he receives

12

permission from the court. Failure to receive the court’s permission before filing a sur-reply will

13

result in it being stricken from the record.

14

In light of plaintiff’s continued allegations that he has confronted difficulties accessing his

15

legal property and the delays these allegations have caused to the progression of this case, the

16

Attorney General’s Office and Deputy Attorney General Elise Thorn shall work with the

17

California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”) to take whatever steps are

18

necessary to ensure that plaintiff is given access to all of his legal property and an opportunity to

19

obtain copies of any documents therein that he believes are necessary to defend against the

20

defendants’ motions for summary judgment. Plaintiff is reminded that he must submit all the

21

evidence he believes creates a genuine issue of material fact for trial. He cannot simply state that

22

he will produce the evidence at trial.

23

II.

24

Allegations of Harassment by Correctional Staff
Plaintiff continues to file numerous “notices” and “motions” related to his allegations that

25

CDCR employees are tampering with his legal mail and property and subjecting him to various

26

forms of harassment. ECF Nos. 275, 278, 279, 280, 281. The court has already addressed nearly

27

identical allegations by plaintiff on several occasions (ECF Nos. 116, 146, 252, 262) and based on

28

its previous findings, the court finds that plaintiff’s claims are not credible and continue to be
3

1

unsupported. Plaintiff has been advised that his allegations will not be considered unless they are

2

supported by evidence, and hearsay statements are not evidence. Id. Despite this, plaintiff

3

continues to rely on hearsay and speculation to support his allegations rather than providing

4

evidence, such as declarations or affidavits from the alleged witnesses.2 Simply claiming these

5

individuals will testify at trial is insufficient to constitute competent evidence to support a motion.

6

If plaintiff wants the court to consider witnesses’ testimony, he must provide signed declarations

7

or affidavits from them. For these reasons, plaintiff’s various filings regarding the actions of

8

CDCR employees (ECF Nos. 275, 278, 279, 280, 281) will be disregarded.

9

III.

10

Settlement Conference
In some of his most recent filings, plaintiff indicates a desire to settle this case. ECF Nos.

11

280, 281. Defendants will be directed to advise the court whether they believe a settlement

12

conference would be beneficial at this time.

13

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

14

1. Plaintiff’s requests for an extension of time (ECF Nos. 270, 273, 282) are granted in

15

part. Plaintiff shall have until August 27, 2015, to submit documents in support of his response to

16

defendants’ motions for summary judgment. Any documents plaintiff seeks to submit must be

17

filed as a single filing.

18

2. The Attorney General’s Office and Deputy Attorney General Elise Thorn shall work

19

with the CDCR to take whatever steps are necessary to ensure that plaintiff is given access to all

20

of his legal property and an opportunity to obtain copies of any documents therein that he

21

believes are necessary to defend against the defendants’ motions for summary judgment.

22

3. Defendants’ current deadline to file their replies in support of their motions for

23

summary judgment is vacated. Defendants’ time to file their replies will not begin to run until

24

plaintiff either files his supplemental documentation or his time for doing so expires, whichever

25

occurs first. Defendants shall have fourteen days to file their replies.

26

2

27
28

In one document plaintiff identifies a correctional officer who is allegedly willing to testify on
his behalf and asks that the court redact out his name prior to filing. ECF No. 281. The court
does not provide redaction services. Documents mailed to the Clerk of the Court for filing are
filed as they are received.
4

1
2
3

4. Plaintiff’s various filings regarding the actions of CDCR employees (ECF Nos. 275,
278, 279, 280, 281) will be disregarded.
5. Within ten days of the filing of this order, defendants shall advise the court whether

4

they believe a settlement conference in this case would be beneficial at this stage.

5

DATED: July 28, 2015.

6

________________/S/__________________
ALLISON CLAIRE
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5