Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-01113/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-01113-48/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

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SERGIO ALEJANDRO GAMEZ,

 Plaintiff,

 vs.

F. GONZALEZ, et al.,

 Defendants.

1:08-cv-01113-LJO-GSA-PC

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S 

REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF 

DEADLINE AS MOOT

(ECF No. 204.)

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S 

REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO FILE 

REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE OF 

DOCUMENTS

(ECF. No. 205.)

I. BACKGROUND

Sergio Alejandro Gamez (APlaintiff@) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis with this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ' 1983. Plaintiff filed this action on 

August 1, 2008. (Doc. 1.) 

This action now proceeds with the Fourth Amended Complaint filed on November 8, 

2013, against defendants K. Holland (Warden, CCI), F. Gonzalez (Former Warden, CCI), J. 

Tyree (IGI, CCI), J. Gentry (Former IGI, CCI), G. Adame (Assistant IGI, CCI), and G. 

Jakabosky (SSU Special Agent) for due process violations, and retaliation against Plaintiff in 

violation of the First Amendment. (Doc. 147.) 

On November 23, 2015, Plaintiff filed a motion for an extension of the deadline to file 

dispositive motions, and a motion for leave to file a request for judicial notice. (ECF Nos. 204, 

205.) 

Case 1:08-cv-01113-EPG Document 207 Filed 12/02/15 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

II. MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME

Plaintiff requests an extension of time until January 30, 2016 for the parties to file 

dispositive motions. In light of the fact that on November 25, 2015, the Court extended the 

deadline for the parties to file motions for summary judgment until February 8, 2016, Plaintiff’s 

motion for extension of time is moot and shall be denied as such.

III. MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE

Plaintiff requests leave to file a request for judicial notice of additional documents in 

support of his case, in the event that Defendants file documents for in camera review in 

response to the Court’s order issued on November 9, 2015.1 Plaintiff expresses concern that he 

will not know which documents are submitted for in camera review, leaving him at a 

disadvantage. 

At the status conference held on November 20, 2015 for this action, the Court ordered

defense counsel to submit the documents to the Court for in camera review, after which the 

Court will release all documents to Plaintiff to which he is entitled. (ECF No. 206.) In light of 

this order, Plaintiff’s request for leave to file a request for judicial notice shall be denied. 

IV. CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s motion for extension of time is DENIED as moot; and

2. Plaintiff’s request for leave to file a request for judicial notice is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 1, 2015 /s/

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

 

1 On November 9, 2015, the Court issued an order granting Plaintiff’s motion to compel,

requiring Defendants to provide documents to Plaintiff or submit documents for in camera review, within thirty 

days. (ECF No. 201.)

Case 1:08-cv-01113-EPG Document 207 Filed 12/02/15 Page 2 of 2