Crane v. Rodriguez et al

Filing 137

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 6/5/2017 ORDERING plaintiff's 132 request for an extension of time is GRANTED; plaintiff's 133 reply is deemed timely-filed; defendants' 135 request for leave to file a sur-reply is GRANTED; and defendants shall file a sur-reply within 14 days. (Yin, K)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

RICHARD JOSEPH CRANE,

12
13
14

No. 2:15-cv-0208 TLN KJN P

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

RODRIGUEZ, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel. On May 23, 2017, plaintiff filed

18

his second request for an extension of time to file a reply to defendants’ April 3, 2017 opposition

19

to plaintiff’s motion to compel pursuant to the court’s order of April 21, 2017. On May 26, 2017,

20

plaintiff filed his reply. On June 2, 2017, defendants filed a motion for leave to file a sur-reply to

21

plaintiff’s reply.

22

Good cause appearing, plaintiff’s request is granted, and his reply is deemed timely-filed.

23

Defendants’ motion for leave to file a sur-reply is well-taken based on plaintiff’s inclusion of new

24

issues, and is granted. Defendants shall file a sur-reply within fourteen days from the date of this

25

order. At that time, plaintiff’s motion to compel shall stand submitted, and no further filing in

26

connection with the motion to compel is permitted.

27

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

28

1. Plaintiff’s request for an extension of time (ECF No. 132) is granted;

1

2. Plaintiff’s reply (ECF No. 133) is deemed timely-filed;

2

3. Defendants’ request for leave to file a sur-reply (ECF No. 135) is granted; and

3

4. Defendants shall file a sur-reply within fourteen days from the date of this order.

4

Dated: June 5, 2017

5
6
7
/rh/cw/cran0208.36.sec

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2