Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_03-cv-06290/USCOURTS-caed-1_03-cv-06290-9/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

DAVID MAURICE GOMEZ,

Plaintiff,

v.

WARDEN A. K. SCRIBNER, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:03-CV-6290-OWW-LJO-P

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

FOR A THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE AND

GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR A

COPY OF A LOCAL RULE

(Doc. 69) 

ORDER DIRECTING THE CLERK’S OFFICE

TO SEND PLAINTIFF A COPY OF LOCAL

RULE 78-230

Plaintiff David Maurice Gomez (“plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil

rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On August 16, 2005, plaintiff filed a motion seeking a

court order setting a thirty-day deadline so that he may access the law library or in the alternative

providing him with the Local Rules that may assist him in gaining access to the law library.

Defendants did not file a response.

The court cannot issue unnecessary orders setting deadlines to ensure that plaintiff may

access the law library. Such an action would be improper. However, plaintiff’s request is moot in

any event, as the court, by separate order, provided plaintiff with thirty days in which to file a new

opposition to defendants’ motion for summary judgment.

With respect to the Local Rules, the court will direct the Clerk’s Office to provide plaintiff

with a copy of Local Rule 78-230, which governs civil motions and is the rule that appears

responsive to plaintiff’s request. Local Rule 78-230(m) governs the timing for filing oppositions to

Case 1:03-cv-06290-DLB Document 74 Filed 09/12/05 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

motions and replies to oppositions in this action. In the event that defendants file any motion or

defendants file an opposition to any motion filed by plaintiff, it is this rule that governs the time in

which plaintiff must respond. 

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s motion for a court order setting a thirty-day deadline so that he may access

the law library is DENIED; 

2. Plaintiff’s motion for a copy the Local Rule applicable to deadlines is GRANTED;

and

3. The Clerk’s Office shall send plaintiff a copy of Local Rule 78-230.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 9, 2005 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

b9ed48 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:03-cv-06290-DLB Document 74 Filed 09/12/05 Page 2 of 2