Williams v. Romero et al

Filing 186

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 02/19/2023 GRANTING 184 Motion for Extension of Time and VACATING 183 Findings and Recommendations. Response to 182 Order due within 14 days. (Spichka, K.)

Case 2:17-cv-01884-TLN-DB Document 186 Filed 02/21/23 Page 1 of 3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

LANCE WILLIAMS,

12

No. 2:17-cv-1884 TLN DB P

Plaintiff,

13

v.

14

ROMERO, et al.,

15

ORDER

Defendants.

16
Plaintiff, a former state prisoner, filed this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

17
18

Plaintiff claims defendants Romero and Zuniga violated his Eighth Amendment rights when they

19

closed a mechanical door on him and refused to release him. Plaintiff further claims all

20

defendants violated his Eighth Amendment rights when they denied him medical care.
On January 18, 2023, this court ordered plaintiff to inform the court within twenty days

21
22

whether he wished to proceed with this action and, if so, why he failed to file an opposition to

23

defendant Chuksorji’s summary judgment motion filed November 18, 2022. When the court did

24

not receive a timely response to the January 18 order, this court found plaintiff had failed to

25

prosecute this action and recommended the case be dismissed. (Feb. 15, 2023 Order (ECF No.

26

183).) In a document filed on February 14, but not docketed until February 15,1 plaintiff requests

27

Because plaintiff’s February 14 filing was not docketed until February 15, this court was not
aware of it prior to filing the February 15 findings and recommendations.
1
1

28

Case 2:17-cv-01884-TLN-DB Document 186 Filed 02/21/23 Page 2 of 3
1

a fourteen-day extension of time to respond to the court’s “most recent order.” (ECF No. 184.)

2

On February 17, defendants filed a document in which they note that plaintiff does not identify

3

the court order in his February 14 filing. Defendants state that they do not oppose a fourteen-day

4

extension of time for plaintiff to file objections to this court’s February 15 findings and

5

recommendations. (ECF No. 185.)

6

Plaintiff filed his request for an extension of time on February 14, one day before this

7

court filed the findings and recommendations. Therefore, it is clear he does not seek an extension

8

of the objection period set out in the findings and recommendations. Plaintiff seeks an extension

9

to respond to the court’s “most recent order.” That is the January 18 order requiring plaintiff to

10

explain whether he wishes to proceed with this case. Defendants do not indicate whether they

11

oppose an extension of time for plaintiff to respond to the January 18 order.

12

In his February 14 filing, plaintiff explains that he requires additional time because he is

13

“experiencing mental health decompensation,” suffering “severe nerve and muscle pain,” and is

14

homeless. This court finds those reasons sufficient to permit plaintiff additional time to respond

15

to the court’s January 18 order.

16

This court will vacate the February 15 findings and recommendations to permit plaintiff to

17

respond to the January 18 order. However, plaintiff is warned that if he wishes to proceed with

18

this action, he must heed court orders and the Local Rules. Plaintiff should carefully consider this

19

court’s reasoning in the February 15 findings and recommendations. While this court is

20

sympathetic to the many difficulties plaintiff faces in litigating this case, he must stay involved if

21

he wishes to continue with it.

22

For these reasons, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

23

1.

Plaintiff’s motion for an extension of time (ECF No. 184) is granted;

24

2.

The findings and recommendations filed February 15, 2023 (ECF No. 183) are

25

vacated; and

26

////

27

////

28

////
2

Case 2:17-cv-01884-TLN-DB Document 186 Filed 02/21/23 Page 3 of 3
1

3.

Within fourteen days of the filed date of this order, plaintiff shall respond to the

2

court’s January 18 order. Plaintiff is warned that his failure to file a response within

3

fourteen days could result in a renewed recommendation that this case be dismissed.

4
Dated: February 19, 2023
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

DLB:9
DB Prisoner Inbox/Civil Rights/S/will1884.fta fr vacate

23
24
25
26
27
28
3