Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_07-cv-01673/USCOURTS-cand-4_07-cv-01673-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

27

28

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ISIAH LUCAS, JR.,

Plaintiff,

 v.

M. MIRANDA, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

No. C 07-01673 CW (PR)

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S 

REQUEST FOR STAY AND GRANTING

EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE

OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS'

DISPOSITIVE MOTION; DENYING HIS

REQUEST FOR THE RETURN OF HIS

PERSONAL PROPERTY; AND SETTING

BRIEFING SCHEDULE

(Docket no. 40)

Before the Court is Plaintiff's motion to stay proceedings and

his request for the return of his personal property.

In an Order dated July 12, 2010, the Court granted Plaintiff's

request for an extension of time to file his opposition to

Defendants’ dispositive motion and directed him to file his

opposition no later than August 30, 2010.

In his request for a stay, Plaintiff alleges that on July 1,

2010 he was transferred from the Correctional Training Facility

(CTF) in Soledad to California State Prison-Solano (CSP-Solano) in

Vacaville. He claims that none of his personal property, which

includes his legal materials, was transported with him during the

transfer to CSP-Solano. (Mot. to Stay at 2.) Plaintiff has

submitted multiple administrative forms requesting assistance in

obtaining his property from CTF. (Id. at 2-4.) As of July 21,

2010, the date of the present motion, he claims his efforts have

not been successful. He contends that he needs his legal materials

Case 4:07-cv-01673-CW Document 44 Filed 08/04/10 Page 1 of 5
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

27

28

2

to prepare his opposition. Therefore, he asks the Court to "stay

all matters in litigation" and "to resume once Plaintiff receive[s]

all of his property." (Id. at 5.) He also asks "this Court to

order CTF-Soledad to send Plaintiff's property and/or CSP-Solano to

locate and relinquish to Plaintiff his property." (Id.) 

Defendants oppose Plaintiff's requests and argue that "Plaintiff's

legal materials would not enable him to sucessfully [sic] oppose

the pennding [sic] motion to dismiss." (Opp'n to Mot. to Stay at

1.) The Court finds Defendants' argument unavailing. Plaintiff

should be afforded a fair opportunity to prepare his opposition,

independent of Defendants' assessment of his likelihood of success

in contesting the motion to dismiss. Furthermore, if Defendants

are convinced that "dismissal is inevitable," extending the time

for Plaintiff to file his opposition should cause them no undue

burden. Defendants’ counsel may be in a position to encourage

prison officials to return Plaintiff’s legal materials so that he

can prepare his opposition. Accordingly, Plaintiff's request for a

stay is denied but he is granted a second extension of time to file

his opposition. The parties shall abide by the briefing schedule

outlined below.

Plaintiff's request for the return of his personal property,

including his legal materials, is DENIED. The Court does not have

the power to order a non-party -- such as the warden or other

prison officials -- to provide an inmate with access to any of his

personal legal materials. In addition, such an order would be

inappropriate because the United States Supreme Court has cautioned

lower courts to avoid entanglement in the day-to-day matters of

Case 4:07-cv-01673-CW Document 44 Filed 08/04/10 Page 2 of 5
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

27

28

3

prison administration. See Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. 78, 84-85

(1987) ("Running a prison is an inordinately difficult undertaking

that requires expertise, planning, and the commitment of resources,

all of which are peculiarly within the province of the legislative

and executive branches of government. Prison administration is,

moreover, a task that has been committed to the responsibility of

those branches, and separation of powers concerns counsel a policy

of judicial restraint. Where a state penal system is involved,

federal courts have . . . additional reason to accord deference to

the appropriate prison authorities.") Ordering that personal

property or legal materials be returned to Plaintiff would

interfere with state prison officials' management of the prison. 

The deprivation of legal materials might in some instances rise to

the level of violating an inmate's constitutional right of access

to the courts, see Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343 (1996), but such a

claim would not accrue until the plaintiff-inmate had suffered an

actual injury and would have to be pursued in a new civil rights

action. 

CONCLUSION

Having read and considered Plaintiff's requests and

Defendants' Opposition, and good cause appearing, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that 

1. Plaintiff's request for a stay is denied, but he is

granted a second extension of time to file his opposition. The

deadline for Plaintiff’s opposition to Defendants' dispositive

motion will be extended up to and including September 30, 2010. If

Defendants wish to file a reply brief, they shall do so no later

Case 4:07-cv-01673-CW Document 44 Filed 08/04/10 Page 3 of 5
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

27

28

G:\PRO-SE\CW\CR.07\Lucas1673.2dEOT-Oppn2MTD.wpd 4

than fifteen (15) days after the date Plaintiff's opposition is

filed.

2. Plaintiff's request for the return of his personal

property, including his legal materials, is DENIED. 

3. If Plaintiff's personal property is not recovered by

September 15, 2010, he may request another extension of time to

file his opposition.

4. This Order terminates Docket no. 40. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 8/4/2010 

CLAUDIA WILKEN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:07-cv-01673-CW Document 44 Filed 08/04/10 Page 4 of 5
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

27

28

G:\PRO-SE\CW\CR.07\Lucas1673.2dEOT-Oppn2MTD.wpd 5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ISIAH LUCAS JR.,

Plaintiff,

 v.

M. MIRANDA et al,

Defendant. /

Case Number: CV07-01673 CW 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District

Court, Northern District of California.

That on August 4, 2010, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said

copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by depositing

said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery

receptacle located in the Clerk's office.

Isiah Lucas E-91878

California State Prison-Solano

2100 Peabody Road

Vacaville, CA 95696

Nancy Hudgins

Law Offices of Nancy E. Hudgins

565 Commercial Street, 4th Floor

San Francisco, CA 94111

Dated: August 4, 2010

Richard W. Wieking, Clerk

By: Nikki Riley, Deputy Clerk

Case 4:07-cv-01673-CW Document 44 Filed 08/04/10 Page 5 of 5