From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Underwood v. Mayes

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Dec 20, 2023
2:22-cv-0694 DB P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 20, 2023)

Opinion

2:22-cv-0694 DB P

12-20-2023

ERROL LOVELL UNDERWOOD, Plaintiff, v. ROBERT MAYES, Defendant.


ORDER

DEBORAH BARNES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding with a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On October 20, 2023, plaintiff filed a document entitled “Plaintiff Discovery - Defendant Answer to Plaintiff Interrogatories and Admission.” (ECF No. 33.) Plaintiff introduces the document by explaining that he is filing his discovery. He then goes on to argue the merits of his case. Construing the motion as a motion for summary judgment, defendant sought an extension of time to respond. (ECF No. 34.) In an order filed November 14, this court found that defendant showed good cause for an extension of time. However, because it was not clear plaintiff intended his October 20 filing to be a motion for summary judgment, this court postponed ruling on defendant's motion until plaintiff clarified his filing. Plaintiff has now explained that he did not intend the filing as a motion on the merits.

Accordingly, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Defendant's motion for an extension of time (ECF No. 34) is dismissed as moot; and

2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to amend the docket to identify plaintiff's October 20 filing as a discovery document rather than a motion.


Summaries of

Underwood v. Mayes

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Dec 20, 2023
2:22-cv-0694 DB P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 20, 2023)
Case details for

Underwood v. Mayes

Case Details

Full title:ERROL LOVELL UNDERWOOD, Plaintiff, v. ROBERT MAYES, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Dec 20, 2023

Citations

2:22-cv-0694 DB P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 20, 2023)