Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-02417/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-02417-5/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

JIM DEAN WOLFENBARGER,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-03-2417 MCE PAN P

vs.

VIRGINIA BLACK, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action for relief

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

On June 5, 2006, plaintiff filed a motion for an extension of time to file a reply to

defendants’ answer, and on June 19, 2006, plaintiff filed a document styled as an opposition to

defendant’s answer. Rule 7 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides as follows:

There shall be a complaint and an answer; a reply to a counterclaim

denominated as such; an answer to a cross-claim, if the answer contains a

cross-claim; a third-party complaint, if a person who was not an original

party is summoned under the provisions of Rule 14; and a third-party

answer, if a third-party complaint is served. No other pleading shall be

allowed, except that the court may order a reply to an answer or a thirdparty answer. 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(a) (emphasis added). The court has not ordered plaintiff to reply to defendants’

answer and declines to make such an order.

Case 2:03-cv-02417-MCE -EFB Document 56 Filed 08/03/06 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

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s June 5, 2006 motion for

an extension of time is denied and plaintiff’s June 19, 2006 opposition to defendant’s answer

shall be disregarded.

DATED: July 27, 2006.

12

wolf2417.77e

Case 2:03-cv-02417-MCE -EFB Document 56 Filed 08/03/06 Page 2 of 2