Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_21-cv-00506/USCOURTS-caed-1_21-cv-00506-4/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

PAUL ROBERTS,

Plaintiff,

v.

GAVIN NEWSOM, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:21-cv-00506-ADA-CDB (PC) 

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ 

REQUEST TO EXTEND TIME WITHIN 

WHICH TO FILE RESPONSIVE 

PLEADING

(Doc. 32)

Paul Roberts is proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

I. RELEVANT PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Following screening, the Court ordered service of Plaintiff’s first amended complaint on 

Defendants CIM Warden, Delgadillo, Farooq, Gilman, Lemus, Gonzales, Pilkerton and Torres. 

(Doc. 26.) Defendants waived personal service on August 28, 2023, and a responsive pleading 

was due to be filed no later than October 27, 2023. (Doc. 31.) 

On October 26, 2023, counsel for Defendants moved for a 28-day extension of time 

within which to file a responsive pleading. (Doc. 32.) 

II. DISCUSSION

Defendants request an extension of 28-days within which to file a responsive pleading. 

(Doc. 32 at 3.) Defense counsel declares he was assigned this matter on September 11, 2023. (Id.

at 6, ¶ 2.) Counsel declares that due to the press of business, he has been unable to prepare, file, 

Case 1:21-cv-00506-KES-CDB Document 33 Filed 11/02/23 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

and serve a responsive pleading. (Id., ¶ 3 [detailing multiple assignments and related filings].) 

Defense counsel filed the application ex parte because it is difficult to contact Plaintiff to 

coordinate a stipulation. (Id., ¶ 4.) Counsel has not sought a previous extension of the filing 

deadline and does not believe Plaintiff would be prejudiced by an extension of time. (Id., ¶¶ 4-5.) 

III. CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Accordingly, and for good cause shown, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Defendants’ request for an extension of time within which to file a responsive 

pleading is GRANTED; and

2. Defendants SHALL file a responsive pleading no later than November 24, 2023.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 2, 2023 ___________________ _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:21-cv-00506-KES-CDB Document 33 Filed 11/02/23 Page 2 of 2