Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_02-cv-06018/USCOURTS-caed-1_02-cv-06018-22/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

27

28

1

Request for Extension of Time Brown v. Castillo, et al.

to Responsive Pleading; Order Case No. CV-F-02-6018 AWI DLB P

EDMUND G. BROWN

Attorney General of the State of California

DAVID S. CHANEY

Chief Assistant Attorney General

FRANCES T. GRUNDER

Senior Assistant Attorney General

MICHAEL JORGENSON

Supervising Deputy Attorney General

JULIANNE MOSSLER, State Bar No. 243749

Deputy Attorney General

455 Golden Gate Avenue, Suite 11000

San Francisco, CA 94102-7004

Telephone: (415) 703-5746

Fax: (415) 703-5843

Email: Julianne.Mossler@doj.ca.gov

Attorneys for Defendants Barbeiro, Castillo, 

Curtis, Dulay, Duvall, King, Mathos, and Walker

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT

FRESNO DIVISION

ALFRED BROWN,

Plaintiff,

v.

EDGAR CASTILLO, et al.,

Defendant.

No. CIV F 02 6018 AWI DLB P

EX PARTE REQUEST FOR

EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE

RESPONSIVE PLEADING

ORDER

Defendants Barbeiro, Castillo, Curtis, Dulay, Duvall, King, Mathos, and Walker

respectfully request that this Court grant them an extension of time, up to and including 

April 9, 2007 in which to file their reply to Plaintiff’s Opposition to Motion for Summary

Judgment. The grounds for the motion are as follows:

///

///

///

///

Case 1:02-cv-06018-LJO-DLB Document 164 Filed 03/15/07 Page 1 of 3
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

Request for Extension of Time Brown v. Castillo, et al.

to Responsive Pleading; Order Case No. CV-F-02-6018 AWI DLB P

1. Defendants Barbeiro, Castillo, Curtis, Dulay, Duvall, King, Mathos, and Walker

(Defendants) filed their motion for summary judgment on September 27, 2005. 

2. The certificate of service included with Plaintiff’s Opposition to Defendants’ motion

for summary judgment indicates that it was served on February 20, 2007. According to Local

Rule 78-230(m), Defendants’ reply to Plaintiff’s opposition to motion for summary judgment

was due February 27, 2007. However, Plaintiff’s opposition was not received by Defendants’

counsel until March 9, 2007.

3. Counsel for Defendants is also the attorney primarily responsible for representing state

corrections officials in the class action lawsuit involving conditions of confinement in the

condemned unit at California State Prison, San Quentin entitled Lancaster, et al. v. Tilton, et al.,

United States District Court for the Northern District of California case number C 79-01630

WHA. In that capacity, counsel is currently engaged in extensive discovery, including the

production of over 5000 documents and the defense of six depositions of state corrections

officials. This intensive period of discovery is expected to conclude by April 2, 2007.

4. In addition, counsel will be out of state on business from March 12 through March 16,

2007.

5. In light of these obligations Defendants’ counsel requires additional time to review

and research Plaintiff’s arguments in order to adequately prepare Defendants’ reply to Plaintiff’s

opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment.

6. Defendants request an extension of time up to and including April 9, 2007, within

which to file and serve their reply to Plaintiff’s opposition to motion for summary judgment. 

This is the second request for an extension of time on behalf of Defendants. It is not made for

any purpose of harassment or undue delay or for any improper reason.

7. Plaintiff is a state prisoner and cannot be easily contacted about an extension of time.

///

///

///

///

Case 1:02-cv-06018-LJO-DLB Document 164 Filed 03/15/07 Page 2 of 3
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

Request for Extension of Time Brown v. Castillo, et al.

to Responsive Pleading; Order Case No. CV-F-02-6018 AWI DLB P

WHEREFORE, Defendants request that the Court grant them an extension of time up to

and including April 9, 2007 in which to file their reply to Plaintiff’s opposition to motion for

summary judgment. 

DATED: March 15, 2007.

Respectfully submitted,

EDMUND G. BROWN

Attorney General of the State of California

DAVID S. CHANEY

Chief Assistant Attorney General

FRANCES T. GRUNDER

Senior Assistant Attorney General

MICHAEL JORGENSON

Supervising Deputy Attorney General

/s/ Julianne Mossler

JULIANNE MOSSLER

Deputy Attorney General

Attorneys for Defendants Barbeiro, Castillo, Curtis, 

Dulay, Duvall, King, Mathos, and Walker

02pc6018.ext.brown.dm.wpd

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: March 15, 2007 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

3c0h UNI j8 TED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:02-cv-06018-LJO-DLB Document 164 Filed 03/15/07 Page 3 of 3