Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06624/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06624-11/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

SY LEE CASTLE,

Plaintiff,

v.

A. K. SCRIBNER,

Defendant.

 /

CASE NO. 1:04-CV-06624-AWI-SMS-P

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME AS MOOT IN

LIGHT OF COURT’S ORDER FILED ON

MAY 10, 2006

(Doc. 39)

ORDER STRIKING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

FOR A STAY AS DUPLICATIVE

(Doc. 44)

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

FOR A STAY

(Doc. 42) 

Plaintiff Sy Lee Castle (“plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action is proceeding on plaintiff’s second amended

complaint, filed October 21, 2005, against defendant Scribner for acting with deliberate indifference

to plaintiff’s medical needs, in violation of the Eighth Amendment. On May 11, 2006, plaintiff filed

a motion seeking an extension of time to oppose defendant’s motion for an extension of time. On

May 22, 2006, plaintiff filed a motion seeking a stay, and on June 9, 2006, plaintiff filed another

motion seeking a stay.

Plaintiff’s motion for an extension of time filed on May 11, 2006, is moot in light of the

court’s order filed on May 10, 2006, and shall be denied on that ground. Plaintiff’s motion seeking

Case 1:04-cv-06624-SMS Document 46 Filed 06/30/06 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

a stay filed on June 9, 2006, is duplicative of the motion seeking a stay filed on May 22, 2006, and

shall be stricken from the record for that reason.

With respect to plaintiff motion for a stay filed on May 22, 2006, the court declines to grant

a stay of this action based on plaintiff’s vague, unsupported request. Plaintiff has not submitted any

evidence that he is incapable of prosecuting this action. If defendant files a motion or the court

issues an order requiring plaintiff to take some action, plaintiff may seek an extension of time to

respond to that specific motion or order, and if plaintiff needs an extension of a deadline set by the

court in a scheduling order, plaintiff may seek an extension. However, the court will not issue a stay

of the entire action based on plaintiff’s request. Accepting as true plaintiff’s attestation that he is

suffering from medical problems and is in the infirmary, plaintiff has set forth no specific evidence

concerning his medical condition or demonstrated he is unable to prosecute this action.

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s motion seeking an extension of time to oppose defendant’s motion for an

extension of time, filed on May 11, 2006, is DENIED as moot in light of the court’s

order of May 10, 2006;

2. Plaintiff’s motion seeking a stay, filed on June 9, 2006, is STRICKEN as duplicative

of plaintiff’s motion filed on May 22, 2006; and

3. Plaintiff’s motion seeking a stay, filed on May 22, 2006, is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 30, 2006 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

i0d3h8 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-06624-SMS Document 46 Filed 06/30/06 Page 2 of 2