Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00447/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00447-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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

JOSEPH PUCKETT, )

Plaintiff, )

)

)

v. )

)

JUDGE JONES, et al., ) 

 )

Defendants. )

)

 )

1: 05-CV-00447-REC-SMS 

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S

REQUEST FOR A THIRTY-DAY

EXTENSION OF TIME WITHIN WHICH TO

FILE OBJECTIONS (DOC. 13)

Plaintiff is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se. The

matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant

to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 72-302.

On May 27, 2005, the Court filed findings and a

recommendation that the action be dismissed for failure to state

a claim; the findings and recommendations were served on

Plaintiff and granted Plaintiff thirty days within which to file

objections.

Plaintiff states that the Court granted him only ten days to

file objections. However, this is not true; the Court granted

Plaintiff thirty days within which to file objections. Plaintiff

has not stated facts warranting an extension of time.

Case 1:05-cv-00447-REC -SMS Document 14 Filed 06/24/05 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

Nevertheless, in view of Plaintiff’s apparent misunderstanding,

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s request for an extension of time

IS GRANTED. Plaintiff SHALL FILE objections no later than thirty

days after the date of service of this order. Plaintiff IS

INFORMED that no further extension of time will be granted absent

a showing of facts warranting an extension. The Court cannot

delay the progress of this action indefinitely pending the filing

of objections to the findings and recommendations. A failure to

file timely objections will result in the findings and

recommendation being considered by the district judge without any

objections.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 23, 2005 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00447-REC -SMS Document 14 Filed 06/24/05 Page 2 of 2