Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Jackson v. Andreasen

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


April 1, 2009

FRED LEON JACKSON, JR., PLAINTIFF,
v.
DR. R.L. ANDREASEN, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

ORDER

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983. On January 14, 2009, this court issued findings and recommendations recommending dismissal of this action without prejudice due to plaintiff's failure to timely file a pretrial statement. On February 20, 2009, the district court adopted the findings and recommendations in full and dismissed the action without prejudice. Judgment was entered on the same day.

On March 2, 2009 and March 6, 2009, plaintiff filed requests for reconsideration of the dismissal of this action. Therein, plaintiff alleges that he has been denied physical access to the prison law library since his transfer back to California Medical Facility (CMF).*fn1 Plaintiff seeks an order setting aside the judgment and an extension of time to file objections to this court's findings and recommendations. The court construes these requests together as a motion for relief from judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). Good cause appearing, the court will grant plaintiff a period of thirty days in which to supplement his Rule 60(b) motion with (1) objections to this court's January 14, 2009 findings and recommendations, including a proposed pretrial statement; and (2) an opposition, if any he has, to defendants' September 26, 2009 motion for summary judgment. Failure to supplement the motion with these documents will result in a recommendation that the motion be denied.

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

1. The documents filed by plaintiff on March 2, 2009 and March 6, 2009, taken together, are construed as a motion for relief from judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). So construed, plaintiff is granted thirty days from the date of this order to supplement the motion with (1) objections to this court's January 14, 2009 findings and recommendations, including a proposed pretrial statement; and (2) an opposition, if any he has, to defendants' September 26, 2009 motion for summary judgment. Failure to supplement the motion as directed will result in a recommendation that the motion be denied.

2. Defendants are granted forty-five days from the date of this order to file, as appropriate, a response to plaintiff's Rule 60(b) motion.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.