(PC) Jones v. Palombo, No. 1:2007cv01788 - Document 51 (E.D. Cal. 2010)

Court Description: ORDER DIRECTING Plaintiff to Advise Whether he is in Possession of his Legal Property, and if not, to Outline Which Documents he Needs to be Able to Formulate Objections, if any, to the Findings and Recommendations on the Parties' Motions for Summary Judgment signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 3/29/2010. Notice from Plaintiff due by 4/16/2010. (Bradley, A)

Download PDF
(PC) Jones v. Palombo Doc. 51 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 KEVIN JONES, 10 11 12 13 CASE NO. 1:07-cv-01788-OWW-GSA PC Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO ADVISE WHETHER HE IS IN POSSESSION OF HIS LEGAL PROPERTY, AND IF NOT, TO OUTLINE WHICH DOCUMENTS HE NEEDS TO BE ABLE TO FORMULATE OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, TO THE FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE PARTIES’ MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT v. M. PALOMBO, et al., Defendants. 14 / 15 16 This is a civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by Plaintiff Kevin Jones, a 17 state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis. Pending before the Court is Defendants’ 18 Motion for Summary Judgment, filed June 29, 2009, and Plaintiff’s Cross-Motion for Summary 19 Judgment, filed July 30, 2009, Fed. R. Civ. P. 56. On February 8, 2010, Plaintiff filed a motion 20 stating that he lost possession of his personal property on December 12, 2009. Despite having been 21 granted an extension of time to file his objections and defense counsel having been directed to 22 facilitate Plaintiff’s access to his personal property (Doc. 45), Plaintiff filed a motion which the 23 Court read as seeking further extension on the basis that he had not obtained his property so as to be 24 able to respond to the Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations on the parties’ motions 25 for summary judgment (Doc. 48). The Court issued an order denying Plaintiff’s motion for return 26 of his property and granting a forty-five day extension of time for Plaintiff to file objections to the 27 Findings and Recommendations on the parties’ motions for summary judgment, and directing 28 defense counsel to advise as to steps taken, and the results thereof, to facilitate Plaintiff’s limited 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 access to his legal materials. (Doc. 49.) Defendants responded with a statement of efforts taken; 2 stated that they had ceased such efforts as they interpreted Plaintiff’s motion to indicate that he was 3 already in possession of his desired property; and requested that Plaintiff be ordered to advise 4 whether he still needs additional legal property to formulate objections, and if so, for Plaintiff to 5 outline what specific documents are needed to complete his objections. (Doc. 50.) 6 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff is directed to advise the Court within 7 fifteen (15) days from the date of service of this order to state: (1) whether he still needs additional 8 legal property to formulate objections to the Findings and Recommendations on the parties’ motions 9 for summary judgment; and (2) if so, to outline the specific documents that he needs to complete his 10 objections. 11 12 13 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: 6i0kij March 29, 2010 /s/ Gary S. Austin UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.