(PC) Williams v. Felker et al, No. 2:2008cv00878 - Document 53 (E.D. Cal. 2010)

Court Description: ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 02/24/10 vacating 46 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Plaintiff's motion for clarification 52 is deemed resolved. (Plummer, M)

Download PDF
(PC) Williams v. Felker et al Doc. 53 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 KIRK DOUGLAS WILLIAMS, 11 Plaintiff, 12 vs. 13 No. CIV S-08-0878 LKK GGH P T. FELKER, et al., 14 Defendants. 15 16 ORDER / On September 30, 2009, the Honorable Lawrence K. Karlton granted plaintiff 17 thirty days to file an amended complaint. Thirty days passed and plaintiff did not file an 18 amended complaint. Accordingly, on December 9, 2009, the undersigned recommended that this 19 action be dismissed. 20 On December 23, 2009, plaintiff filed objections to the findings and 21 recommendations. Plaintiff alleged that he was not required to file an amended complaint 22 because the court had not yet ruled on his request for reconsideration of the September 30, 2009, 23 order. Attached to the objections was a copy of a motion for reconsideration of the September 24 30, 2009, order signed by plaintiff on October 13, 2009. 25 26 The court did not receive plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration for some unknown reason. However, in order to determine whether to deem plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 timely, on January 6, 2010, the court ordered plaintiff to file within fourteen days a copy of the 2 proof of service of his motion. On January 25, 2010, plaintiff was granted an extension of time 3 until February 8, 2010, to respond to the January 6, 2010, order. 4 On February 9, 2010, plaintiff filed a “motion for clarification” attached to which 5 is a proof of service for the motion for reconsideration indicating that on October 15, 2009, he 6 gave it to prison officials to mail. Good cause appearing, pursuant to the mailbox rule, plaintiff 7 timely filed his motion for reconsideration. 8 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 9 1. The December 9, 2009, findings and recommendations are vacated; 10 11 2. Plaintiff’s motion for clarification (no. 52) is deemed resolved. DATED: February 24, 2010 12 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows 13 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 14 wil878.vac 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 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.