Opinion
2:23-cv-00287-DJC-CKD (PS)
04-17-2023
JOSHUA JORDAN Plaintiff, v. MATTHEW PROVINS, Defendant.
ORDER
CAROLYN K. DELANEY, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
Plaintiff, Joshua Jordan, filed this fee paid complaint against defendant, Matthew Provins, on February 16, 2023. (ECF No. 1.) Plaintiff effected service of process on defendant on March 7, 2023. (ECF No. 4.) On March 24, 2023, defendant filed a motion to participate in electronic case filing and request for extension of time to respond to the complaint.(ECF No. 5.)
This action is referred to the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72, and Local Rule 302(c)(21).
I. Defendant's motion for extension of time
The court finds good cause for defendant's request for extension of time to respond to the complaint, as defendant proceeds pro se and his mobility is impaired due to a physical disability. (ECF No. 5.) Accordingly, defendant's request for extension of time to respond to the complaint is GRANTED. Defendant shall file a response to plaintiff's complaint within fourteen days of this order.
II. Parties' motions to participate in electronic case filing
Defendant filed a motion to participate in electronic case filing on March 24, 2023. (ECF No. 5.) Generally, “any person appearing pro se may not utilize electronic filing except with the permission of the assigned Judge or Magistrate Judge.” See E.D. Cal. L.R. 133(b)(2). Defendant's motion for electronic case filing does not provide good cause for deviance from the Local Rule applicable to unrepresented litigants. Accordingly, defendant's motion to participate in electronic case filing is denied.
Plaintiff filed a motion to participate in electronic case filing on March 30, 2023. (ECF No. 6.) Plaintiff's motion for electronic case filing does not establish good cause under the Local Rules. Accordingly, plaintiff's motion for electronic case filing is DENIED.
The court acknowledges plaintiff's response to defendant's request for extension of time. However, defendant has shown good cause for the extension of time notwithstanding plaintiff's response.
At the current stage in the proceedings, the court denies both parties' motions to participate in electronic case filing. However, the court will entertain a motion to participate in electronic case filing from either party at a later stage in the proceedings if the moving party has not abused the filing procedures.
ORDER
It is HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Defendant's motion to participate in electronic filing is DENIED; (ECF No. 5;)
2. Defendant's request for an extension of time to respond to plaintiff's complaint is GRANTED. (ECF No. 5.) Defendant shall respond to plaintiff's complaint within fourteen days of this order; and
3. Plaintiff's motion to participate in electronic filing is DENIED. (ECF No. 6.)