Rice v. Bauer

Full title: KORDY RICE, Plaintiff, v. D. BAUER, et al., Defendants.

Court: United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California

Date published: Sep 9, 2015

2:15-cv-236-JAM-EFB P (E.D. Cal. Sep. 9, 2015)

Opinion

KORDY RICE, Plaintiff, v. D. BAUER, et al., Defendants. No. 2:15-cv-236-JAM-EFB P United States District Court, E.D. California. September 9, 2015

          ORDER

          EDMUND F. BRENNAN, Magistrate Judge.

         Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. His response to defendants' motion to dismiss is due on September 21, 2015. He has filed a declaration stating that he has not been provided with sufficient library time in order to prepare his response. ECF No. 23.

         Accordingly, the court will grant plaintiff another 30 days within which to file a response. If plaintiff is denied access to the law library after following appropriate procedures to access it, and requires more time to file his response, he may request another extension of time indicating what efforts he has made to access the library and who has prevented him from doing so.

         Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's response to defendants' motion to dismiss shall be filed within 30 days of the date of this order and the Clerk of the Court shall terminate docket number 23.