Glass v. Featherly
Filing
51
ORDERED that Glass's motion, (ECF No. 50 ), is granted and the Clerk is directed to mail a copy of Defendants' motion for summary judgment and exhibits, (ECF No. 45 ), to Glass at High Desert State Prison. (Copy of ECF No . 45 attached hereto for distribution to P via HDSP law library.) IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Glass's motion for extension of time, (ECF No. 49), is GRANTED, in part and DENIED, in part such that Glass's response to Defendants' motion for summary judgment, (ECF No. 45 ), is now due on or before Monday, March 18, 2024. Signed by Magistrate Judge Carla Baldwin on 2/6/2024. (Attachments: # 1 Copy of ECF 45 for Plaintiff)(Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
3
***
4
MICHAEL GLASS,
5
6
7
Case No. 3:22-CV-00280-CLB
Plaintiff,
v.
[ECF Nos. 49, 50]
FEATHERLY, et al.,
8
ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S
MISCELLANEOUS MOTIONS
Defendants.
9
10
Before the Court are two motions filed by Plaintiff Michael Glass (“Glass”) on
11
February 5, 2024. First, Glass filed a motion for the reproduction of Defendants’ motion
12
for summary judgment. (ECF No. 50.) Next, Glass filed a motion to extend time to file a
13
response to Defendants’ motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 49.) Both motions claim
14
that Glass was not provided a legible copy of Defendants’ motion for summary judgment
15
by the Nevada Department of Corrections (“NDOC”) facility at which he is housed. (See
16
ECF Nos. 49, 50.) The Court will address each motion in turn.
17
First, Glass requests that the Court provide him with a readable copy of the motion
18
for summary judgment so he can properly oppose the motion. (ECF No. 50.) It is not the
19
Court’s obligation to provide litigants, even indigent ones, with copy services. However,
20
in the interest of judicial economy and due to Glass’s claims that he did not receive a
21
legible copy of this motion in the first instance, the Court will grant Glass’s request in this
22
instance. Therefore, Glass’s motion is granted, and the Clerk is directed to mail a copy of
23
the motion for summary judgment and exhibits, (ECF No. 45), to Glass at High Desert
24
State Prison.
25
Next, the Court will address Glass’s request for a 90-day extension of time to file
26
an opposition to Defendants’ motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 49 at 3-4.) Glass
27
explains the extension is necessary to allow time to receive a readable copy of the motion
28
and to allow Glass and his “inmate substitute counsel” to review the case file and
1
evidence. These reasons are insufficient to support a 90-day extension for the deadline.
2
Defendants’ motion for summary judgment was filed on January 10, 2024. (ECF
3
No. 45.) The following day, Glass was given notice of the motion pursuant to the
4
requirements of Klingele v. Eikenberry, 849 F.2d 409 (9th Cir. 1988), and Rand v.
5
Rowland, 154 F.3d 952 (9th Cir. 1998) (ECF No. 47). In this notice, Glass was explicitly
6
advised that he was required to file his opposition within 21 days after receipt of the
7
motion. (ECF No. 47.) However, Glass did not file a timely opposition, nor did he file a
8
timely motion for an extension of time. In spite of this, the Court sua sponte extended the
9
deadline for Glass to file an opposition to the motion for summary judgment by no later
10
than March 4, 2024. (ECF No. 48.)
11
In his motion, Glass has not sufficiently explained why he needs over four times
12
the amount of time ordinarily allowed for an opposition to a motion for summary judgment.
13
Moreover, as the Court has already extended the date for his opposition by 30 days prior
14
to the receipt of this motion, the requested extension is partially moot. However, given
15
Glass’s claimed difficulties in receiving a legible copy of the motion for summary
16
judgment, the Court finds that some additional time to file an opposition is appropriate.
17
Therefore, Glass’s motion for extension of time, (ECF No. 49), is granted, in part
18
and denied, in part. Specifically, the Court extends the deadline to file the opposition to
19
Defendants’ motion for summary judgment by an additional 14 days. Therefore, Glass
20
shall have until Monday, March 18, 2024, to file an opposition to Defendants’ motion for
21
summary judgment. Glass is advised that no further extensions of time will be granted
22
absent extraordinary circumstances. If Glass fails to file an opposition, the motion for
23
summary judgment will be submitted to the court for decision.
24
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Glass’s motion, (ECF No. 50), is granted and
25
the Clerk is directed to mail a copy of Defendants’ motion for summary judgment and
26
exhibits, (ECF No. 45), to Glass at High Desert State Prison.
27
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Glass’s motion for extension of time, (ECF No.
28
49), is GRANTED, in part and DENIED, in part such that Glass’s response to
2
1
Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, (ECF No. 45), is now due on or before
2
Monday, March 18, 2024.
3
IT IS SO ORDERED.
4
February 6, 2024
DATED: ______________.
5
6
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
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?