Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_02-cv-02689/USCOURTS-caed-2_02-cv-02689-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL CLARK,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-02-2689 FCD GGH P

vs.

L. WARREN, et al.,

Defendant. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to

42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the court is plaintiff’s January 10, 2006, request to vacate the

scheduling order. Pursuant to the August 3, 2006, scheduling order, the cut-off date for pretrial

motions was January 20, 2006. On February 16, 2006, defendants filed a summary judgment

motion after having been granted an extension of time.

Plaintiff claims that he requires additional time to prepare his own summary

judgment motion on several grounds. First, plaintiff contends that he has several motions to

compel pending before the court. On February 6, 2006, the court issued an order addressing

plaintiff’s motions to compel. 

Plaintiff next argues that he requires additional time to prepare his summary

judgment motion because on November 15, 2005, he conducted depositions and has yet to

Case 2:02-cv-02689-FCD-GGH Document 97 Filed 02/23/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26 The court will consider a motion filed by plaintiff requesting access to the transcripts. 1

2

receive the transcripts. Plaintiff alleges that the reporter from the deposition mailed the

transcripts to plaintiff’s mother, who is prohibited from mailing them to plaintiff. Plaintiff

claims that the reporter has refused to permit plaintiff’s mother to return the transcripts. Plaintiff

states that he may be required to file a lawsuit in state court regarding this matter. 

The court will not delay the resolution of this action while plaintiff engages in

state court litigation regarding his access to transcripts. The court will grant plaintiff thirty days

from the date of this order to file his summary judgment motion as well as his opposition to

defendants’ motion. 

1

Plaintiff next states that he requires an extension of time because he only recently

reviewed the transcript from his own deposition. Plaintiff states that he will require two weeks

before he can obtain a finalized transcript. As stated above, the court will grant plaintiff an

extension of thirty days from the date of this order.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s January 10, 2006, request to vacate the scheduling order is denied;

2. Plaintiff is granted thirty days from the date of this order to file his crossmotion for summary judgment and his opposition to defendants’ summary judgment.

DATED: 2/22/06

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 

 GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

ggh:kj

cl2689.ord

Case 2:02-cv-02689-FCD-GGH Document 97 Filed 02/23/06 Page 2 of 2