Nguyen v. California Prison Health Service, et al.

Filing 55

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 9/15/16 ORDERING that plaintiff shall have until December 27, 2016 to file any opposition to Defendant Elams Motion to Dismiss (ECF 51 ), and that Rule 230 (l) will continue to apply with respect to the motion.(Dillon, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

SACRAMENTO DIVISION

11
12
13

Case No. 2:13-cv-963-EFB

NAM BA NGUYEN,

14
15
16
17

v.
CALIFORNIA PRISON HEALTH
SERVICE, et al.,

18

---------------[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING
Plaintiff, DEFENDANTS’ REQUEST TO EXTEND
ALL DEADLINES BY 90 DAYS
PENDING PLAINTIFF’S RELOCATION
AND RESOLUTION OF IMMIGRATION
STATUS
Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6)

Defendants. Action Filed: 5/15/2013

19
This § 1983 action was filed by former prison inmate Plaintiff Nam Ba Nguyen against

20
21

Defendants Dr. Osman, Nurse Sherman Champen, R.L Andreason, Nathanial Elam and California

22

Prison Health Service on May 15, 2013. Plaintiff advises that he was paroled on September 8,

23

2016, but that he was taken into custody of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and is

24

currently trying to resolve his immigration status. Plaintiff has requested a 90 day stay of all

25

currently pending deadlines, including the deadline to oppose Defendant Elam’s Motion to

26

Dismiss (ECF 51). Defendants do not oppose the request, but ask that all deadlines be extended

27

for 90 days.

28

//
1
--------[Proposed] Order Granting Defendants’ Request to Extend All Deadlines for 90 Days (2:13-cv-963-EFB)

1

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the following will be the new schedule of deadlines in this

2

matter:

3

Defendants’ deadline to complete discovery

12/16/2016

4

Plaintiff’s deadline to complete discovery

1/21/2017

5

Plaintiff’s deadline to amend the complaint

12/16/2016

6

Dispositive motions deadline

3/2/2017

7

Plaintiff’s deadline to oppose Defendant Elam’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF 51)

12/27/2016

8

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall have until December 27, 2016 to file any

9

opposition to Defendant Elam’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF 51), and that Rule 230 (l) will continue

10

to apply with respect to the motion.

11
12
13

September 15, 2016
DATED:_____________________

_____________________________
Hon. Edmund F. Brennan
U.S. Magistrate Judge

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2

--------[Proposed] Order Granting Defendants’ Request to Extend All Deadlines for 90 Days (2:13-cv-963-EFB)