Zavala v. Rios

Full title: RAUL SANCHEZ ZAVALA, Plaintiff, v. HECTOR RIOS, et al., Defendants.

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Sep 8, 2015

Case No. 1:09-CV-00679-MJS (PC) (E.D. Cal. Sep. 8, 2015)

Opinion

Case No. 1:09-CV-00679-MJS (PC)

09-08-2015

RAUL SANCHEZ ZAVALA, Plaintiff, v. HECTOR RIOS, et al., Defendants.

Michael J. Seng UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

GRANT, IN PART, AND DENY, IN PART, PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO STAY THE PROCEEDINGS (ECF No. 134.)

I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Plaintiff is a prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971) and 28 U.S.C. § 1331. The action proceeds on a Fifth Amendment due process claim against Doe Defendants A and B. On August 31, 2015, the Court granted Defendant Gonzaga's motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 135.)

Before the Court is Plaintiff's motion to stay the proceedings (ECF No. 134.). Defendant Gonzaga has not filed a response and the time to do so has passed. This matter is deemed submitted. Local Rule 230(l).

II. MOTION TO STAY PROCEEDINGS

Plaintiff moved for an order directing non-parties to respond to his written questions. Defendant's filed an opposition. Plaintiff now moves to stay the proceedings to allow him time to reply to Defendant's response to his motion. As grounds, he states he currently does not have access to his legal documents and does not know when BOP officials will be returning them.

The Court does not find good cause exists for an indefinite stay of the proceedings. The Court will provide Plaintiff a copy of his original motion and Defendant's response and grant Plaintiff a limited extension of fourteen (14) days from the date of service of this order in which to file a reply. No other extensions will be granted.

III. CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Clerk of the Court shall mail Plaintiff a copy of his motion for an order directing non-parties to respond to his written questions (ECF No. 132.) and a copy of Defendant's response to his motion (ECF No. 133.); and

2. Plaintiff has fourteen (14) days from the date of service of this order in which to file a reply. No other extensions will be granted.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 8, 2015

/s/ Michael J . Seng

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE