Opinion
1:18-cv-00507-AWI-SAB (PC)
08-02-2021
JERRY DILLINGHAM, Plaintiff, v. N. EMERSON, et al., Defendants.
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF (ECF NO. 109)
Plaintiff Jerry Dillingham is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
Currently before the Court is Plaintiff's motion for administrative relief, filed July 30, 2021.
On November 25, 2020, Defendants filed the instant motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 94.)
On November 30, 2020, Defendants filed a motion to stay discovery and modify the scheduling order. (ECF No. 95.) On January 5, 2021, the Court granted Defendants' motion to stay merits-based discovery and vacated the discovery and dispositive motions deadlines. (ECF No. 99.)
Plaintiff requested and received three extensions of time to file an opposition, but failed to file a timely opposition to Defendants' motion.
On July 27, 2021, the undersigned issued Findings and Recommendations recommending that Defendants' motion for summary judgment be granted. (ECF No. 108.)
In the current motion for administrative relief, Plaintiff contends that July 6, 2021, he served a response to Defendants' separate statement of undisputed facts, along with several pages of exhibits, and Plaintiff requests that the Court take judicial notice of the proof of service page.
Plaintiff is advised that to date the Court has not received a copy of the alleged response to Defendants' separate statement of undisputed facts, nor has the Court received any other filings by Plaintiff related to Defendants' motion for summary judgment. Accordingly, the Court cannot take judicial notice of a document that was not filed with the Court, and Plaintiffs motion is denied. At this juncture, if Plaintiff wishes to address Defendants' motion for summary judgment and/or the Findings and Recommendations issued on July 27, 2021, he may do so by filing objections, which are due on or before August 30, 2021.
IT IS SO ORDERED.