Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_03-cv-05125/USCOURTS-caed-1_03-cv-05125-7/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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOHN R. MARTINEZ,

Plaintiff,

v.

W. SHAW, et. al., 

Defendants.

 /

CV F 03 5125 OWW SMS P

ORDER GRANTING REQUEST FOR

EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE OPPOSITION

TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

(Doc. 67.) 

John R. Martinez (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis

in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

Defendants filed a Motion for Summary Adjudication on November 18, 2005. On

December 14, 2005, Plaintiff moved for an extension of time to file an Opposition to the Motion

contending he needed more time to access the law library. The Court granted the request on

December 21, 2005. 

On January 24, 2006, Plaintiff again moved for an extension of time citing limited law

library access as justification. The Court granted his request on February 7, 2006. 

On March 9, 2006, Plaintiff moved for his third extension of time, again citing to limited

law library access. The court will grant Plaintiff this final extension of time. Plaintiff had notice

of the Motion for Summary Adjudication since November of last year. Plaintiff’s duty in

Case 1:03-cv-05125-OWW -SMS Document 68 Filed 03/15/06 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

formulating an Opposition to such a motion does not require law library research or citation to

legal authority. Plaintiff indicates that he is about half way done but needs another 24 pages to

complete his Opposition. This implies that the Opposition will be at least fifty pages long. 

Plaintiff should take care not to make his Opposition so lengthy it clouds the Court’s ability to

determine whether there is a genuine issue of disputed fact. In any event, as noted above,

Plaintiff is not required to cite to legal authority in formulating an Opposition to a Motion for

Summary Adjudication and thus, the general justification that law library access is needed does

not present good cause for an extension of time. As such, no further extensions will be granted

but upon a showing of EXTREMELY GOOD CAUSE. The Court will proceed with the

resolution of the Motion at the expiration of this final extension of time. 

The Court HEREBY ORDERS: 

1. The Opposition is due within thirty days of the date of service of this Order. 

No further extensions will be granted but upon a showing of extremely good cause.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 13, 2006 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:03-cv-05125-OWW -SMS Document 68 Filed 03/15/06 Page 2 of 2