Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-01169/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-01169-8/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

Plaintiff states in his opposition that he is unable to 1

review Henderson v. Hubbard, 2010 WL 599886, 1:08 CV 01632 OWW YNP

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MADERO POUNCIL, 

NO. CIV. S-09-1169 LKK/CMK P

Plaintiff,

v.

O R D E R

JAMES TILTON, et al.,

Defendant.

 /

On April 9, 2010, defendants requested that this court certify

its order denying in part their motion to dismiss for appeal to the

Ninth Circuit. On April 19, 2010, the court denied the request as

to all questions except whether plaintiff’s claims are barred by

the statute of limitations. The court ordered plaintiff to file an

opposition to defendants’ request as to the remaining question

within forty-five days. On May 15, 2010, plaintiff filed an

opposition to defendants’ request. On May 24, 2010, defendants 1

Case 2:09-cv-01169-JAM-CMK Document 32 Filed 06/10/10 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

SMS (PC) (E.D. Cal. Feb. 18, 2010), an unpublished case. The court

grants defendant's request for interlocutory appeal largely due to

this opinion, which is in disagreement with this court's order.

Under the current version of E.D. Cal. Local Rule 133(i)(3),

parties are no longer required to attach unpublished decisions that

are available on Westlaw or Lexis to their memoranda of law. While

this amended rule is reasonable in the court's general civil

practice, it appears to cause significant burden on pro se

prisoners who lack access to Westlaw or Lexis. Because the court

certifies the question for appeal in large part because of the

difference of opinion on the question, the court attaches the

Henderson opinion to this order in the interests of fairness.

2

filed a reply brief in support of their request.

The court has considered the memoranda filed in this case, and

CERTIFIES for interlocutory appeal the question of whether

plaintiff’s claims are barred by the statute of limitations to the

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: June 9, 2010.

Case 2:09-cv-01169-JAM-CMK Document 32 Filed 06/10/10 Page 2 of 2