Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_23-cv-01131/USCOURTS-caed-2_23-cv-01131-6/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 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

ERIC RYAN HAYDE, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

TAMARA TABER, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:23-cv-1131 AC P 

ORDER 

 By order filed January 22, 2024, the undersigned granted plaintiff’s motion to modify the 

discovery and scheduling order and extended the time to serve discovery requests to March 14, 

2024, and the time to file motions to compel to May 13, 2024. ECF No. 24. Plaintiff has now 

filed a second motion for an extension of time to serve discovery requests and file a motion to 

compel. ECF No. 28. In his motion, plaintiff states that he was hospitalized from March 13 to 

March 22, 2024, and then transferred to a different prison yard after he was attacked by his 

cellmate on March 27, 2024. Id. at 1-2. As a result, plaintiff was temporarily separated from his 

property. Id. at 2. He also appears to assert that due to staffing issues, he was unable to access 

the law library on two of his scheduled days. Id. 

 The deadline to serve written discovery requests has already been extended once at 

plaintiff’s request, and he has not explained why he was unable to serve requests during the time 

he has already been provided. With respect to the request to extend the time to file motions to 

Case 2:23-cv-01131-AC Document 30 Filed 04/17/24 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 

27 

28 

2 

compel, approximately one month still remains before the current deadline expires, and plaintiff 

has not explained why the remaining time is insufficient. The motion will therefore be denied 

without prejudice to a motion that explains how much additional time plaintiff is seeking, why he 

requires the additional time, and why the time he has already been provided was not enough. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for an extension of time 

(ECF No. 28) is DENIED without prejudice. 

DATED: April 16, 2024 

Case 2:23-cv-01131-AC Document 30 Filed 04/17/24 Page 2 of 2