Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-01380/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-01380-18/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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GEORGE H. ROBINSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

D. ADAMS, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:08-cv-01380-AWI-SKO PC

ORDER PARTIALLY GRANTING MOTION

(Doc. 76)

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

rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On September 15, 2010, Plaintiff filed a motion

requesting that the Court strike Defendants' motion for summary judgment from the record, or in the

alternative, grant Plaintiff an extension of time to file an opposition to Defendants' motion for

summary judgment. (Doc. #76.)

Plaintiff requests that the Court strike Defendants' motion for summary judgment because

Defendants' arguments in support of their motion are without merit and are based on false evidence. 

Defendants filed a dispositive motion on the question whether Plaintiff exhausted his administrative

remedies prior to filing suit. Plaintiff argues that Defendants' motion is untimely because it was

filed after the deadline for filing dispositive motions on the issue of exhaustion.

The Court will not strike Defendants' motion based solely on Plaintiff’s allegations that the

motion lacks merit or because the motion is untimely. To the extent that Defendants' motion should

be denied, Plaintiff must set forth his arguments in an opposition to Defendants' motion. Therefore,

rather than striking the motion, the Court will grant Plaintiff an extension of time to file an

1

Case 1:08-cv-01380-AWI-BAM Document 77 Filed 09/28/10 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

opposition to Defendants' motion for summary judgment.

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's September 15, 2010, motion is

PARTIALLY GRANTED:

1. Plaintiff's request to strike Defendants' motion for summary judgment is DENIED;

and

2. Plaintiff's request for an extension of time to file an opposition to Defendants'motion

for summary judgment is GRANTED. Plaintiff's opposition shall be due within

thirty (30) days of the date of service of this order. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 27, 2010 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto 

ie14hj UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2

Case 1:08-cv-01380-AWI-BAM Document 77 Filed 09/28/10 Page 2 of 2