Opinion
ORDER
CAROLYN K. DELANEY, Magistrate Judge.
Claimant Matthew Gillum has requested that he be notified 21 days prior to the filing of any motion by plaintiff. Due to claimant's incarceration, motion practice in this matter is governed by Local Rule 230(l) which provides for opposition to be filed 21 days after service of a motion. Claimant's request will therefore be denied as moot. This ruling is made without prejudice to claimant requesting an extension of time to file opposition to a specific motion. Any request for extension of time must be supported by a showing of good cause for such extension.
Local Rule 230(l) provides: "All motions, except motions to dismiss for lack of prosecution, filed in actions wherein one party is incarcerated and proceeding in propria persona, shall be submitted upon the record without oral argument unless otherwise ordered by the Court. Such motions need not be noticed on the motion calendar. Opposition, if any, to the granting of the motion shall be served and filed by the responding party not more than twenty-one (21), days after the date of service of the motion. A responding party who has no opposition to the granting of the motion shall serve and file a statement to that effect, specifically designating the motion in question. Failure of the responding party to file an opposition or to file a statement of no opposition may be deemed a waiver of any opposition to the granting of the motion and may result in the imposition of sanctions. The moving party may, not more than seven (7) days after the opposition has been filed in CM/ECF, serve and file a reply to the opposition. All such motions will be deemed submitted when the time to reply has expired."
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that claimant's motion for 21 day notice (ECF No. 33) is denied as moot.