Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-00014/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-00014-8/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

DENNIS MARTEL,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-0014 DFL PAN P

vs.

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF

CORRECTIONS, et al., ORDER AND

Defendants. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to

42 U.S.C. § 1983. Several matters are pending before the court.

On December 27, 2005, plaintiff filed a motion for leave to amend his complaint

together with a proposed amended complaint. Defendants have not opposed the motion. Good

cause appearing, defendants will be directed to show cause in writing why plaintiff’s motion

should not be granted.

On January 19, 2006, defendants filed a request for an extension of time, to an

including February 2, 2006, to serve a response to a set of interrogatories served by plaintiff on

December 7, 2005. Good cause appearing, defendants’ request will be granted nunc pro tunc to

February 2, 2006.

/////

Case 2:04-cv-00014-ALA Document 40 Filed 03/01/06 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

Finally, on February 15, 2006, defendants filed a document styled as an opposition

to a motion to compel that defendants represent was mailed to them by plaintiff on January 30,

2006. No motion to compel has been filed in this court on or after that date. Defendants’

opposition will be placed in the court record and disregarded.

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Within twenty days from the date of this order defendants shall show cause in

writing, if any they have, why plaintiff’s December 27, 2005 motion to amend his complaint

should not be granted;

2. Defendants’ January 19, 2006 request for extension of time to serve responses

to interrogatories is granted nunc pro tunc to February 2, 2006; and

3. Defendants’ February 15, 2006 opposition to plaintiff’s motion to compel shall

be placed in the court record and disregarded.

DATED: Feburary 27, 2006. 

12

mart0014.o

Case 2:04-cv-00014-ALA Document 40 Filed 03/01/06 Page 2 of 2