Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_00-cv-06496/USCOURTS-caed-1_00-cv-06496-2/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

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TIMOTHY BUFORD,

Plaintiff,

v.

DR. VANG, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:00-CV-6496-REC-SMS-P

ORDER LIFTING STAY IN PART,

GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR

AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE AN

OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO

COMPEL, AND PROVIDING DEFENDANT

WITH FIFTEEN DAYS TO FILE A REPLY TO

PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION TO HIS MOTION

FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER

(Docs. 155, 156, and 157)

Plaintiff Timothy Buford (“plaintiff”) is a prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis

in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On November 22, 2004, defendant Broome

(“defendant”) filed motion seeking a protective order. On December 8, 2004, plaintiff filed an

opposition. On November 29, 2004, plaintiff filed a motion to compel. On December 9, 2004,

defendant filed a request for an extension of time to file an opposition.

This action has been stayed since December 8, 2004, pursuant to court order. By this order,

the stay shall be lifted in part. Discovery remains stayed pending resolution of defendant’s motion

for a protective order and plaintiff’s motion to compel. Defendant may within fifteen days, if he so

chooses, file a reply to plaintiff’s opposition to his motion for a protective order. Defendant’s

request for an extension of time to oppose plaintiff’s motion to compel shall be granted and

defendant shall file an opposition within thirty days.

/// 

Case 1:00-cv-06496-LJO -SMS Document 172 Filed 07/08/05 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

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The stay in this action is lifted in part as set forth in this order;

2. Defendant’s motion for an extension of time to file an opposition to plaintiff’s

motion to compel, filed December 9, 2004, is GRANTED;

3. Defendant’s opposition to plaintiff’s motion to compel shall be filed within thirty

(30) days from the date of service of this order; and

4. Defendant’s reply to plaintiff’s opposition to his motion for a protective order, if any,

shall be filed within fifteen (15) days from the date of service of this order. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 7, 2005 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:00-cv-06496-LJO -SMS Document 172 Filed 07/08/05 Page 2 of 2