Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_14-cv-05448/USCOURTS-cand-4_14-cv-05448-4/pdf.json

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

---

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

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANTONIO CORTEZ BUCKLEY,

Plaintiff,

v.

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, ET AL.,

Defendants.

Case No. 14-cv-05448-YGR 

ORDER VACATING DISMISSAL AND 

GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR 

EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO 

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS

Plaintiff Antonio Buckley proceeds pro se in this action against the County of San Mateo, 

Sherriff Greg Munks, and eight deputy sheriffs. On April 30, 2015, defendant County of San 

Mateo filed a motion to dismiss this lawsuit, and for a more definite statement. (Dkt. No. 30.) 

Mr. Buckley failed to respond and thereafter sought an extension of time to file his response (Dkt. 

No. 36), and the Court granted him an extension until July 13, 2015. (Dkt. No. 39.) Mr. Buckley 

again failed to meet his obligation to file a response and defendants filed a reply of no opposition 

to its motion to dismiss on July 17, 2015. (Dkt. No. 40.) As a result of Mr. Buckley’s repeated 

failure to meet his obligation to respond, the Court dismissed the action without prejudice for 

failure to prosecute on July 23, 2015. (Dkt. No. 42). 

On July 24, 2015, the Court learned that Mr. Buckley mailed a request for extension of 

time to respond (Dkt. No. 43) on July 20, 2015, three days prior to dismissal of the action. The 

request details Mr. Buckley’s diligence in attempting to secure legal representation. Despite his 

diligent attempts, Mr. Buckley has been unable to engage an attorney to represent him and is now

working on a response to defendants’ motion with the assistance of the Court’s Legal Help Center. 

Case 4:14-cv-05448-YGR Document 44 Filed 07/29/15 Page 1 of 2
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

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

Under these circumstances, and given the Court’s preference for deciding matters on the merits, 

the Court finds it appropriate to allow Mr. Buckley an opportunity to pursue his claims and 

respond to defendants’ motion.

Accordingly, the Court’s order dismissing the case is hereby VACATED (clerk to reopen 

case) and Mr. Buckley’s request for extension of time to respond is GRANTED. Mr. Buckley shall 

respond to defendants’ motion to dismiss no later than AUGUST 28, 2015. Mr. Buckley is 

cautioned that failure to respond in a timely manner pursuant to this extended deadline may result 

in dismissal of the action for failure to prosecute. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 29, 2015

______________________________________

YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

Case 4:14-cv-05448-YGR Document 44 Filed 07/29/15 Page 2 of 2