IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
April 14, 2011
KENNETH ALAN SIERRA,
J. WOODFORD, ET AL.,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gary S. Austin United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER GRANTING EXTENSIONOF TIME TO FILE OBJECTIONS OBJECTIONS DUE IN THIRTY DAYS
(ECF Nos. 84, 86)
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On April 23, 2010, findings and recommendations were entered, recommending that Plaintiff's in forma pauperis status be revoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), and Plaintiff be directed to submit the filing fee in full. Plaintiff requested an extension of time and on May 28, 2010, Plaintiff was granted an extension of time to file objections. Plaintiff requested a second extension of time, and on July 6, 2010, Plaintiff was granted a thirty day extension of time. On August 24, 2010, Plaintiff was granted a third extension of time. On October 7, 2010, Plaintiff was granted a fourth extension of time. Plaintiff now requests a fifth extension of time to file objections.
Plaintiff makes vague arguments regarding difficulties he is having gaining access to his legal property, as well as allegations regarding "obstruction of mail." Plaintiff re-asserts rambling arguments regarding events that occurred in 1999, arguments that the Court has addressed in earlier rulings. The issue before the Court is clear. Plaintiff is not entitled to proceed in forma pauperis unless he meets the standard set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). The Court has found that the operative pleading in this case fails to meet that standard. Because the operative pleading is based on factual allegations, Plaintiff has personal knowledge of the facts alleged. No legal research is required, and Plaintiff does not need access to the law library to address the objections. Plaintiff is advised that, although the present motions for extension of time will be granted, no further extensions of time will be granted. Thirty days from the date of service of this order, the April 23, 2010, recommendation will be submitted to the District Court, regardless of whether objections have been filed.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff is granted a final extension of time to file objections to the findings and recommendations. Plaintiff's objections are due thirty days from the date of service of this order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.