From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Harris v. Bakeman

United States District Court, E.D. California, Fresno Division
Apr 2, 2009
No. 1:05-CV-01097-PHX-SRB (E.D. Cal. Apr. 2, 2009)

Opinion

No. 1:05-CV-01097-PHX-SRB.

April 2, 2009


ORDER


On March 9, 2009 this Court granted Plaintiff his requested 30 day extension to respond to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment. On March 20, 2009 Plaintiff requested a 60 day extension claiming he did not have his legal property and therefore was unable to properly respond to Defendant's motion.

Defendant filed a Non-Opposition to Plaintiff's Second Request for an Extension of Time and advised the Court therein that Plaintiff's transfer was a temporary one to a medical facility and he has since returned to the California State Prison — Sacramento where his legal materials remained during his brief transfer to the medical facility.

IT IS ORDERED granting Plaintiff's Request for an Extension. The due date for his response is June 1, 2009. (Doc. 65).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying as moot Plaintiff's request for an order regarding his legal property.


Summaries of

Harris v. Bakeman

United States District Court, E.D. California, Fresno Division
Apr 2, 2009
No. 1:05-CV-01097-PHX-SRB (E.D. Cal. Apr. 2, 2009)
Case details for

Harris v. Bakeman

Case Details

Full title:David D. Harris, Plaintiff, v. Bruce M. Bakeman, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California, Fresno Division

Date published: Apr 2, 2009

Citations

No. 1:05-CV-01097-PHX-SRB (E.D. Cal. Apr. 2, 2009)