Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-01380/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-01380-57/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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GEORGE H. ROBINSON,

Plaintiff,

 v.

D. G. ADAMS, et al.,

 Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

1:08cv1380-AWI-BAM (PC)

ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S 

MOTION TO SET MOTION DATES FOR 

PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS

(ECF No. 194)

Plaintiff George H. Robinson (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this 

civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action proceeds on Plaintiff’s complaint 

against Defendants David, Miranda, Melo, Garcia, Mendoza and Masiel for use of excessive 

force in violation of the Eighth Amendment; against Defendants Adams and Ruiz for failure to 

protect in violation of the Eighth Amendment; and against Defendants Martinez, David, Miranda 

and Garcia for assault and battery in violation of state law.

On October 28, 2013, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting that the Court set a date for any 

opposition to Plaintiff’s “request for sanctions for Defendant Martinez’s failure to comply with 

court order.” (ECF No. 194.) It appears that Plaintiff is requesting that the Court set a date for 

Defendant Martinez to file an opposition to Plaintiff’s Request for Sanctions for Defendant 

Martinez’s Failure to Comply with Court Order, which was served on October 15, 2013, and 

filed on October 18, 2013. (ECF No. 192.) 

Case 1:08-cv-01380-AWI-BAM Document 198 Filed 11/06/13 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

Pursuant to Local Rule 230(l), Defendant Martinez’s deadline to respond to the motion is 

twenty-one (21) days after the date of service of the motion. By the Court’s calculation, 

Defendant Martinez’s response to the motion is due on or before November 8, 2013. Plaintiff’s 

reply is due seven (7) days after the opposition, if any, has been filed. 

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion requesting that the Court set a date for Defendant 

Martinez’s response is DENIED as unnecessary. Defendant Martinez’s opposition to the motion, 

if any, is due on or before November 8, 2013, and Plaintiff’s reply is due seven days after the 

opposition has been filed. Following resolution of the motion, the Court shall issue a Second 

Scheduling Order setting forth the remaining deadlines in this action, including trial dates. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 6, 2013 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:08-cv-01380-AWI-BAM Document 198 Filed 11/06/13 Page 2 of 2