IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
December 20, 2011
EARL D. SMITH, PLAINTIFF,
B. PRIOLO, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On May 20, 2011, defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. As of November 14, 2011, plaintiff had not yet responded to defendants' motion. Accordingly, the court ordered plaintiff to file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to the motion. Dckt. No. 27. Subsequently, plaintiff filed a request for an extension of time and a request for access to his legal property. Dckt. Nos. 28, 29. Plaintiff explained that he mailed his only copy of his opposition brief directly to defense counsel, rather than to the court. Plaintiff requested that the court assist him in locating his opposition brief. Alternatively, plaintiff requested an extension of time to draft a new opposition brief. However, plaintiff stated he would first need an order directing prison officials to give him access to his legal and personal property.
On December 8, 2011, plaintiff filed a declaration and a statement of disputed facts in opposition to defendants' motion for summary judgment. Dckt. Nos. 30, 31. These documents, filed in opposition to defendants' motion for summary judgment, are deemed timely filed, and appear to render moot plaintiff's requests for an extension of time and/or access to his property.
Accordingly, plaintiff's request for an extension and a request for access to his legal property, (Dckt. Nos. 28, 29) are denied as moot.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.