Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-01229/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-01229-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
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

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

KENNETH JEROME PACKNETT,

Plaintiff,

v.

FERNAND ALVAREZ, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 15-cv-01229-YGR (PR)

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING 

IN PART PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR 

EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE OPPOSITION 

TO DEFENDANTS’ DISPOSITIVE MOTION; 

AND GRANTING HIS REQUEST TO FILE 

UNTIMELY REPLY TO DEFENDANTS’ 

OPPOSITION TO HIS MOTION FOR 

RECONSIDERATION

Before the Court is Plaintiff’s request for an extension of time in which to file his 

opposition to Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment and Motion to Dismiss. Dkt. 56. 

Plaintiff requests an extension of time, up to and including November 16, 2016, in which to file 

his opposition on the grounds that his library access is limited at the prison where he is 

incarcerated. Dkt. 56 at 1. Plaintiff also requests a “[n]in[e]ty (90) day continuance from 

December 16, 2016 until April 16, 2017 to complete his responsive pleading.” Id. The Court 

construes Plaintiff’s aforementioned request as a second request for a continuance to file his 

opposition up to and including April 16, 2017, which the Court notes is beyond his requested 

ninety-day continuance. 

Having read and considered Plaintiff’s request, and good cause appearing, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s request for an extension of time is GRANTED 

in part and DENIED in part. The time in which Plaintiff may file his opposition to Defendants’ 

dispositive motion will be extended up to and including November 16, 2016. Therefore, 

Plaintiff’s request for such an extension is GRANTED. However, the Court finds that Plaintiff is 

not entitled to a second continuance, and DENIES his request for a continuance to file his 

opposition up to and including April 16, 2017. 

Case 4:15-cv-01229-YGR Document 57 Filed 10/17/16 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

Defendants shall file a reply brief no later than fourteen (14) days after the date Plaintiff’s 

opposition is filed. 

Also before the Court is Plaintiff’s request to file an untimely reply to Defendants’ 

opposition to his motion for reconsideration. Dkt. 55. The Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s request and 

directs the Clerk of the Court to file the document entitled, “Request for Leave of Court to File 

**Untimely Reply to Defendants[’] Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration,” and 

docket it as “Plaintiff’s Reply to Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion for 

Reconsideration.” 

This Order terminates Docket Nos. 55 and 56. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: 

______________________________________ 

YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS 

United States District Court Judge 

October 17, 2016

Case 4:15-cv-01229-YGR Document 57 Filed 10/17/16 Page 2 of 2