Knowles-Browder v. California Forensic Medical Group Staff

Full title: RYAN BRAN KNOWLES-BROWDER, Plaintiff, v. CALIFORNIA FORENSIC MEDICAL GROUP…

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

Date published: Aug 10, 2006

No. CIV S-05-1260 FCD DAD P (E.D. Cal. Aug. 10, 2006)

Opinion

No. CIV S-05-1260 FCD DAD P.

August 10, 2006

ORDER

DALE DROZD, Magistrate Judge

In two documents dated July 30, 2006, both of which were received for filing on August 2, 2006, plaintiff has informed the court of his anticipated release from state prison on August 2, 2006. Plaintiff has also requested leave to appear at all future hearings.

Plaintiff's new address has been entered on the court's docket. Plaintiff is advised that the rules applicable to documents mailed by prisoners do not apply to unincarcerated litigants. For litigants who are not incarcerated, a document is filed when it is "delivered into the custody of the Clerk and accepted by the Clerk for inclusion in the official records of the action." Local Rule 1-101. Plaintiff's subsequent filings must be received by the Clerk for filing on or before any due date set by court order or applicable rules. Plaintiff is cautioned that untimely filings may be disregarded.

This court's standard order governing prisoner cases includes the following provision:

If plaintiff is released from prison at any time during the pendency of this case, any party may request application of other provisions of Local Rule 78-230 in lieu of Local Rule 78-230(m). In the absence of a court order granting such a request, the provisions of Local Rule 78-230(m) will govern all motions described in #7 above regardless of plaintiff's custodial status.

Order filed July 27, 2005, at 3. Plaintiff's request to appear at all future hearings appears to be a request for application of other provisions of Local Rule 78-230(m).

Plaintiff's request will be granted in part. Defendants' summary judgment motion filed March 16, 2006, has been fully briefed and is on the court's submitted list. This submitted motion will not be set for hearing. If defendants' motion is denied in whole or in part, the court will issue a scheduling order which will provide that selected motions be noticed for hearing and briefed in accordance with Local Rule 78-230(b) through (d). Until such an order is issued, however, Local Rule 78-230(m) will continue to govern all motions described in #7 of the court's order filed July 27, 2005.

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff's August 2, 2006 request to appear at all future hearings is granted in part.