Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-02260/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-02260-4/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

ROBERT E. THOMPSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

J. HARTLEY, et al., 

Defendant(s).

Case No. 1:10-cv-02260-MJS (PC)

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT

CAMPBELL’S MOTION FOR JOINDER IN 

SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION

(ECF No. 37)

Twenty-One Day Deadline For Plaintiff 

To File Any Supplemental Opposition

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ 

MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO REPLY 

TO PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION TO 

SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION

(ECF No. 38)

Seven-Day Deadline For Defendants’ To 

File Joint Reply

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights 

action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter proceeds on the Second Amended 

Complaint on an excessive force claim against Defendants Tercero and Campbell. On 

August 7, 2014, Defendant Tercero filed a motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff filed 

opposition to the motion on September 19, 2014. 

Before the Court are (1) Defendant Campbell’s October 14, 2014 motion to join in 

Defendant Tercero’s motion for summary judgment, and (2) Defendants’ October 30, 2014 

Case 1:10-cv-02260-LJO-MJS Document 39 Filed 11/07/14 Page 1 of 3
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

motion to extend the current October 31, 2014 deadline to respond to Plaintiff’s opposition 

to the summary judgment motion. 

I. JOINDER MOTION

The Court finds good cause to grant Defendant Campbell’s joinder motion provided 

Plaintiff has an opportunity to supplement his previously filed opposition. The Court has 

discretion to allow amendment of a motion in the interests of justice where no prejudice to 

the adverse party is apparent. Fed. R. Civ. P. 7; Hupp v. Switzerland of Ohio Local School 

Dist., 912 F.Supp.2d 572, 604 (S.D. Ohio 2012) (court has discretion to allow supplemental 

briefing). 

Plaintiff has not opposed the joinder motion. Defendant Campbell was not served

with this lawsuit until August 20, 2014, after filing of the summary judgment motion and 

Plaintiff’s opposition to it. Campbell’s alleged liability arises from the same incident as 

Defendant Tercero. The exhaustion issue raised on Defendant Tercero’s summary 

judgment motion equally concerns the claim against Defendant Campbell.

It does not appear that allowing Campbell to join in the summary judgment motion 

will cause prejudice to Plaintiff. Nevertheless Plaintiff will be allowed to supplement his 

September 19, 2014 opposition, as provided below, should he wish do to so. 

II. EXTENSION OF TIME

The Court also finds good cause to exercise discretion to extend time. An extension 

of time normally will be granted in the absence of bad faith on the part of moving party or

prejudice to the adverse party. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b); California Trout v. F.E.R.C., 572 F.3d 

1003, 1027 n.1 (9th Cir. 2009); see also Ahanchian v. Xenon Pictures, Inc., 624 F.3d 1253, 

1259 (9th Cir. 2010). The Court previously extended time in order that defense counsel 

could request the documents needing review. (See ECF No. 35.) Defendants’ counsel 

states she needs a further extension of time due to the press of other business and in order 

Case 1:10-cv-02260-LJO-MJS Document 39 Filed 11/07/14 Page 2 of 3
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

3

to review the requested documents, complete the reply brief and have it approved by her 

supervisor.

III. ORDER

Accordingly, for the reasons stated, it is HEREBY ORDERED that: 

1. The motion of Defendant Campbell to join in the summary judgment motion of 

Defendant Tercero in its entirety (ECF No. 37) is GRANTED provided that 

Plaintiff may, but need not, file supplemental opposition to the summary 

judgment motion by not later than 21 days following service of this Order; and 

2. The motion of Defendants Tercero and Campbell to extend the current 

October 31, 2014 deadline to reply to Plaintiff’s opposition to summary 

judgment motion (ECF No. 38) is GRANTED provided that any joint reply

must be filed within seven days following filing of supplemental opposition, or 

if no supplemental opposition is filed then within seven days following the 

above deadline to file supplemental opposition. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 7, 2014 /s/Michael J. Seng 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:10-cv-02260-LJO-MJS Document 39 Filed 11/07/14 Page 3 of 3