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.

Brian Ellis Porter v. Cherylee Wegman

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


February 26, 2013

BRIAN ELLIS PORTER, PLAINTIFF,
v.
CHERYLEE WEGMAN, DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Dennis L. Beck United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO EXCUSE LATE FILING OF OPPOSITION NUNC PRO TUNC (ECF No. 43) ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT'S OPPOSITION (ECF No. 39)

Plaintiff Brian Ellis Porter ("Plaintiff") is a prisoner in the custody of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation ("CDCR"). Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action is proceeding against Defendant Cherylee Wegman for violation of the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 ("RLUIPA"). On February 3, 2011, Plaintiff filed a motion for preliminary injunction.*fn1 On February 6, 2012, Defendant filed her opposition. On March 20, 2012, Plaintiff filed his reply.

Pending before the Court is Defendant's motion, filed April 3, 2012, to file a supplemental opposition. ECF No. 39. On May 7, 2012, Plaintiff filed his opposition.*fn2 The matter is submitted pursuant to Local Rule 230(l).

Defendant moves to supplement their opposition to include a declaration and additional exhibits which demonstrate vendor receipts and food item purchases. ECF No. 39. Plaintiff opposes 3 this filing, contending that Defendant is responding to arguments raised by Plaintiff in his reply, and 4 a circumvention of Local Rule 230(l). ECF No. 44.

The Court agrees with Plaintiff. Pursuant to Local Rule 230(l), a motion in a prisoner action is deemed submitted after the filing of the reply. The Court did not request additional briefing.

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant's motion to file a supplemental opposition, 8 filed April 3, 2012, is denied.*fn3

IT IS SO ORDERED.


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.