Opinion
No. C 08-00621 WHA (PR)
03-08-2013
TIMOTHY CRAYTON, Plaintiff, v. CORRECTIONAL OFFICER A. HEDGPETH, et al., Defendants.
ORDER GRANTING REQUEST FOR
STAY
This is a civil rights action filed under 42 U.S.C. 1983 by a California prisoner proceeding pro se. On August 7, 2012, the court granted defendants' motion to dismiss misjoined defendants and claims. (Dkt. 221.) The court found that Claims 7 and 8, raising claims of deliberate indifference, were properly joined, and could proceed without violating Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 18 or 20. The court gave plaintiff the option to file a second amended complaint raising claims other than Claims 7 and 8, if he preferred to proceed with other claims instead. Plaintiff requested, and the court granted, two extensions of time within which to file a second amended complaint. On December 14, 2012, having received no second amended complaint, the court dismissed Claims 10, 11, 12, 13, 16, and 17 without prejudice to re-filing in a separate lawsuit, and set a briefing schedule. (Dkt. 232.)
On January 18, 2013, defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. (Dkt. 234.) On February 13, 2013, plaintiff filed a status report in which he requests a stay of the proceedings. (Dkt. 239.) In plaintiff's status report, he states that, on January 11, 2013, he was transferred to Salinas Valley State Prison ("SVSP"). Plaintiff further states that because of the prison transfer, he has not yet received all of his legal materials; because SVSP is on lockdown, some of his legal materials will remain in the property unit and be unavailable to him; plaintiff's ADA accomodation typewriter was not transferred with him; and plaintiff was denied preferred legal user status to the SVSP law library.
The Clerk shall note plaintiff's change of address from Kern Valley State Prison to SVSP.
The court notes that plaintiff argues that he is being prevented from filing his second amended complaint. However, the time for filing such complaint has already passed. (Dkt. 232.)
--------
Based on plaintiff's allegations, the court will GRANT his request for a stay. This case is STAYED until JUNE 12, 2013. Upon that date, the stay will automatically be lifted without further order from this court. Plaintiff's opposition to defendants' motion for summary judgment (dkt. 234, 235, 236) will also be on JUNE 12, 2013. Defendants must file their reply no later than 14 days thereafter.
As plaintiff has been previously advised, due to the age of this case, any further requests for extensions of time will be granted only in the most compelling circumstances
IT IS SO ORDERED.
________________________
WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
G:\PRO-SE\WHA\E.D. CAL\CRAYTON621\CRAYTON621eot7.wpd