Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_08-cv-01344/USCOURTS-caed-2_08-cv-01344-30/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARK ANTHONY MORENO,

Plaintiff, No. 2:08-cv-1344 JAM EFB P

vs.

DAVID MEDINA, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42

U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff requests an extension of time to file objections to findings and

recommendations he received on July 27, 2012. Dckt. No. 106. He also moves to compel

defense counsel and the warden at RJ Donovan Correctional Facility to provide him with his

personal property and to produce copies of his legal documents and medical records. Dckt. Nos.

107, 108. For the reasons stated below, plaintiff’s motions are denied. 

Plaintiff’s request for an extension of time references findings and recommendations

issued on or around July 27, 2012. However, the court did not issue any order or findings and

recommendations on or around that date. Findings and recommendation were issued on June 29,

2012, but on August 9, the court vacated those findings and recommendations. Plaintiff’s

request for an extension of time must therefore be denied as unnecessary.

1

Case 2:08-cv-01344-JAM-EFB Document 111 Filed 09/18/12 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

Plaintiff also seeks a court order for the return of his personal and legal property. 

Plaintiff previously made a similar request with the court, and the court informed him that he

was required to use the administrative appeals process available at his institution to resolve the

issue. Dckt. No. 105. In his current filings plaintiff indicates that he has commenced the

administrative appeals process, but that he has not yet received a response. Although the

administrative appeals process may be taking longer than plaintiff would like, plaintiff muse

await a response to his appeal and must not circumvent the process by seeking relief from the

court. 

The court notes that defendants re-filed their summary judgment motion on September

10, 2012. Dckt. No. 109. Plaintiff may rely on the opposition he filed to defendants’ first

summary judgment motion, or he may file a new opposition brief on or before October 10, 2012. 

If plaintiff wishes to file a new opposition but is unable to meet this deadline, he may request an

extension of time from the court explaining why he was unable to complete an opposition in the

time provided.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motions (Dckt. Nos. 106, 107,

108) are denied. 

Dated: September 18, 2012.

2

Case 2:08-cv-01344-JAM-EFB Document 111 Filed 09/18/12 Page 2 of 2