Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-00925/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-00925-2/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOHNNY L. FRANKLIN, JR.,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-03-0925 DFL DAD P

vs.

CAMILLE WILLIAMS, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

On March 3, 2006, findings and recommendations were filed in this action

recommending that defendants’ motion for summary judgment be granted and that this action be

dismissed. Any objections to those findings and recommendations were to be filed and served by

March 22, 2006. On March 20, 2006 plaintiff filed a request for an extension of time to file

objections which states in its entirety as follows:

Plaintiff is request more time do to the fact plaintiff has been

working on a criminal case as of now and need more time to

respone. 30 day’s extension would see appropriate in the would

allow? 

(Plaintiff’s Request for More Time filed March 20, 2006).

Plaintiff does not provide any information about the criminal case he is

purportedly working on and whether it involves criminal charges pending against himself or

Case 2:03-cv-00925-DFL-DAD Document 51 Filed 03/22/06 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

2

someone else. Plaintiff also has not indicated the nature of his objections to the pending findings

and recommendations, the progress he has made in drafting those objections or why he needs an

additional thirty days to file and serve those objections. Finally, the undersigned notes that

plaintiff filed an opposition to the defendants’ motion for summary judgment which was twentysix handwritten pages in length as well as a separate statement of undisputed facts and exhibits. 

In those documents plaintiff has attempted to set forth his arguments with respect to the motion

pending before the court in great detail and to the best of his ability.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's March 20, 2006, request

for an extension of time to file his objections to the pending findings and recommendations, is

denied.

DATED: March 22, 2006.

DAD:4

fran925.eot

Case 2:03-cv-00925-DFL-DAD Document 51 Filed 03/22/06 Page 2 of 2