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.

Arthur Carr v. H. Her

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


July 25, 2011

ARTHUR CARR, PLAINTIFF,
v.
H. HER, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kendall J. Newman United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel. Multiple motions are pending which this court will address seriatim.

On May 27, 2011, plaintiff filed a motion to file a document in excess of 25 pages, accompanied by his 43 page opposition to the pending motion for summary judgment. Good cause appearing, plaintiff's motion is granted.

On June 6, 2011, plaintiff filed a motion to amend the declaration submitted in support of plaintiff's opposition to defendants' motion for summary judgment. Defendants have not filed an opposition or objection. Good cause appearing, plaintiff's motion is granted. The court will consider the June 6, 2011 revisions in ruling on the pending motion for summary judgment.

On June 20, 2011, plaintiff filed a motion for extension of time to file a surreply to defendants' reply to plaintiff's opposition to the motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff alleges defendants raised new arguments in the reply. On June 22, 2011, defendants filed an opposition disputing plaintiff's claim. Plaintiff is advised that Local Rule 230(l) makes no provision for the filing of a surreply. Thus, plaintiff's June 20, 2011 motion is denied.

On July 1, 2011, plaintiff filed a motion for extension of time to file a reply to defendants' opposition to plaintiff's motion for extension of time to file a surreply. On July 21, 2011, plaintiff filed a second motion for extension of time. However, because the filing of a surreply is not permitted, plaintiff's motions are unnecessary and are denied.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's May 27, 2011 motion (dkt. no. 116) is granted;

2. Plaintiff's June 6, 2011 motion to amend the declaration (dkt. no. 124) is granted;

3. Plaintiff's June 20, 2011 motion for extension of time to file a surreply (dkt. no. 127) is denied; and

4. Plaintiff's July 1, 2011 and July 21, 2011 motions for extension of time to file a reply to defendants' June 22, 2011 opposition are denied. (Dkt. Nos. 131 & 135)

carr0826.den

20110725

© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.



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.