Jones v. Clark, et al.

Filing 49

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 9/3/15 ORDERING that Plaintiff need not respond to defendants motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 44 ) until the court so orders; and Plaintiffs motion for extension of time (ECF No. 48 ) is DENIED as moot.(Dillon, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

GERALD JONES,

12

No. 2:14-cv-0987 CKD P

Plaintiff,

13

v.

14

C. CLARK, et al.,

15

ORDER

Defendants.

16
Plaintiff has requested an extension of time to file an opposition to defendant’s August 12,

17
18

2015 motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 48.) However, due to outstanding discovery

19

issues, the court has vacated the dispositive motion deadline. (ECF No. 47.) Similarly, plaintiff

20

need not respond to defendant’s summary judgment motion until the discovery process is

21

complete. The court will reset the dispositive motion deadline at a later time, along with a

22

deadline for plaintiff to respond to defendant’s motion.

23

////

24

////

25

////

26

////

27

////

28

////
1

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

2

1. Plaintiff need not respond to defendant’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 44)

3
4
5

until the court so orders; and
2. Plaintiff’s motion for extension of time (ECF No. 48) is denied as moot.
Dated: September 3, 2015

_____________________________________
CAROLYN K. DELANEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

6
7
8
9
10
11
12

2 / jone0987.36

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2