(PC) Germany v. Coelho, et al., No. 1:2017cv00005 - Document 39 (E.D. Cal. 2017)

Court Description: ORDER Denying Plaintiff's 36 Motion for Extension of Time to File an Opposition and Granting Extension of Time to File Further Objections to November 9, 2017 Findings and Recommendations signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 12/06/2017. Thirty-Day Deadline. (Flores, E)
Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 FRANKIE L. GERMANY, 12 13 14 15 Plaintiff, v. M. COELHO, et al., Defendants. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No.: 1:17-cv-00005-DAD-SAB (PC) ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE AN OPPOSITION AND GRANTING EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE FURTHER OBJECTIONS TO NOVEMBER 9, 2017 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS [ECF No. 36] Plaintiff Frankie L. Germany is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for an extension of time to file an opposition to Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, filed November 29, 2017. On September 11, 2017, Defendants filed an answer to the complaint. On September 13, 2017, the Court issued the discovery and scheduling order. 23 On September 28, 2017, Defendants filed the instant motion for summary judgment for failure 24 to exhaust the administrative remedies. Plaintiff did not file an opposition within twenty-one days the 25 date of service of the motion. Local Rule 230(l). Therefore, on November 9, 2017, the undersigned 26 issued Findings and Recommendations recommending that Defendants’ exhaustion-related motion for 27 summary judgment be granted and the action be dismissed, without prejudice. (ECF No. 31.) 28 1 On November 29, 2017, Plaintiff filed objections and a motion for an extension of time to file 1 2 an opposition to Defendants’ motion for summary judgment. (ECF Nos. 33, 36.) Plaintiff indicates that his deadline to file an opposition does not expire until December 13, 3 4 2017, and the Court prematurely issued the November 9, 2017 Findings and Recommendations. 5 Plaintiff is mistaken. As stated in the Court’s January 4, 2017, first informational order, Local Rule 6 230(l) sets out the schedule for briefing motions. (ECF No. 3, Order at 3:8.) Pursuant to Local Rule 7 230(l), any opposition to the granting of a motion shall be filed within twenty-one days after the date 8 the motion was served. Local Rule 230(l). The deadlines set forth in the Court’s September 13, 2017 9 scheduling order provided the deadlines for the filing of initial dispositive motions, not the time for 10 filing oppositions thereto. (ECF No. 22.) Thus, Plaintiff’s opposition to Defendants’ September 28, 11 2017, motion for summary judgment was due on or before October 19, 2017. Therefore, Plaintiff’s 12 request for an extension of time to file an opposition shall be denied as untimely. However, in the 13 interest of justice, the Court will grant Plaintiff thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order to 14 file further objections to the November 9, 2017 Findings and Recommendations. 15 Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that: 16 1. 17 28, 2017, motion for summary judgment is denied; and 2. 18 19 Plaintiff’s motion for extension of time to file an opposition to Defendants’ September Plaintiff is granted thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order to file further objections to the Court’s November 9, 2017 Findings and Recommendations. 20 21 IT IS SO ORDERED. 22 Dated: 23 December 6, 2017 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 24 25 26 27 28 2