Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05595/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05595-13/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

[Proposed] Order

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FRESNO DIVISION

ANDREW LOPEZ,

Plaintiffs,

v.

A. K. SCRIBNER, et al. ,

Defendants.

NO. 1:04-CV-05595 OWW DLB P

ORDER

On June 27, 2006, Defendant Yale filed a request to act in excess of time after Plaintiff

brought to his attention the fact that Yale, in responding to Plaintiff’s statement of undisputed

facts filed in support of his dispositive motion, overlooked two of the eighteen statements filed

by Plaintiff. Yale explained that it was through workload and excusable neglect that statement

Nos. 17 and 18, were not addressed. He has simultaneously with his request, filed an amended

response.

Good cause appearing, Defendant’s request is granted. Defendant’s amended response

to Plaintiff’s statement of undisputed facts is hereby filed nunc pro tunc to June 16, 2006, when

Defendant filed his original response.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: June 30, 2006 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

3c0h UNI j8 TED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-05595-DLB Document 96 Filed 07/03/06 Page 1 of 1