(PC) White v. Sacramento District Attorney, et al., No. 2:2014cv01292 - Document 12 (E.D. Cal. 2014)
Court Description: ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 11/13/14 ORDERING that plaintiffs request for a stay or continuance, ECF No. 11 , construed as a request for an extension of time, is granted; Plaintiff is granted sixty days to file objections to the findings and recommendations, ECF No. 10 , filed on October 6, 2014; and there will be no further extension of time.(Dillon, M)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) White v. Sacramento District Attorney, et al. Doc. 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 LLOYD WHITE, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 15 No. 2:14-cv-1292 TLN AC P v. ORDER SACRAMENTO COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY, et al., Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights action seeking relief 18 19 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On October 6, 2014, the court recommended dismissal of plaintiff’s 20 complaint without leave to amend, granting plaintiff twenty-one days to file objections. ECF No. 21 10. Plaintiff has not filed objections, instead seeking a six-month stay/continuance to “present a 22 meaningful case.” ECF No. 11.1 In recommending the summary dismissal of this action, the 23 undersigned made clear that no manner in which the defects of the complaint could be cured by 24 amendment could be discerned. In the pending request, plaintiff neither disputes this 25 determination nor addresses it in any way. Rather, plaintiff complains that while he was housed 26 in jail in Sacramento County he was denied access to the law library. He states that now that he is 27 28 1 Plaintiff submitted the identical request in another case he filed for which summary dismissal has also been recommended. See Case No. 14-cv-1289 TLN AC P. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 in special needs custody in reception in state prison, he has only been allowed two visits to the 2 library. 3 Based on a complaint that has been dismissed for plaintiff’s wholesale failure to state a 4 claim, plaintiff provides no colorable basis for a stay in, or continuance of, this action. 5 Nevertheless, the court will construe plaintiff’s request as one for an extension of time to file 6 objections to the recommendation that the action be dismissed without leave to amend for failure 7 to state a claim and will permit such an extension. 8 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that: 9 1. Plaintiff’s request for a stay or continuance, ECF No. 11, construed as a request for an 10 11 12 13 14 extension of time, is granted; 2. Plaintiff is granted sixty days to file objections to the findings and recommendations, ECF No. 10, filed on October 6, 2014; and 3. There will be no further extension of time. DATED: November 13, 2014 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.
