Gibbs v. California Department of Fish and Game et al
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 3/2/2016 DENYING 50 Motion as to the plaintiff's request for leave to file an amended complaint; DENYING 50 Motion as to the plaintiff's request for a continuance of all deadlines; G RANTING 50 Motion as to the plaintiff's request for an extension of time to file an opposition to the 43 Motion for Summary Judgment; ORDERING the plaintiff to file his opposition within 30 days; ORDERING Defendants Boyd and Little to file any reply within 15 days after service of the plaintiff's opposition. (Michel, G.)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
ROBERT ALAN GIBBS,
BOYD, et al.,
Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action. Pending before
the court is plaintiff’s motion (Doc. 50).
In his motion, plaintiff seeks leave to join additional defendants to this action. He
also seeks a “continuance on all matters pending in the court to beyond November 20th, 2016, as
I am currently in the Shasta Co. Jail.”
Plaintiff’s request to join additional defendants is construed as a motion for leave
to amend. So construed, the motion is denied because plaintiff has not submitted a proposed
Plaintiff’s request for a continuance is denied. Plaintiff has not demonstrated why
he is unable to prosecute this litigation from the Shasta County Jail. Moreover, as to the motion
for summary judgment brought by defendants Edwards and Jackson, plaintiff has not explained
why he failed to initially respond to the motion, which was originally filed in August 2015. Nor
has plaintiff explained why he did not seek an extension of time as to that motion before now.
As to the motion for summary judgment filed by defendants Boyd and Little in December 2015,
plaintiff’s current motion is construed as a motion for an extension of time to respond to the
motion. Given plaintiff’s recent incarceration, and good cause appearing therefor, plaintiff will
be granted additional time to respond to the motion filed by defendants Boyd and Little.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
To the extent plaintiff seeks leave to amend, plaintiff’s motion (Doc. 50) is
To the extent plaintiff seeks a continuance of all deadlines until after
November 20, 2016, plaintiff’s motion (Doc. 50) is denied;
To the extent plaintiff seeks an extension of time to respond to the motion
for summary judgment filed by defendants Boyd and Little, plaintiff’s motion (Doc. 50) is
Plaintiff may file an opposition to the motion for summary judgment filed
by defendants Boyd and Little within 30 days of the date of this order; and
Defendants Boyd and Little may file a reply brief within 15 days after the
date of service of plaintiff’s opposition, if any is filed.
DATED: March 2, 2016
CRAIG M. KELLISON
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?