1:26-cv-00819•(PC) Salazar v. Campbell et al
Gesamter Gesetzestext
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA JOHN DAVID SALAZAR, Plaintiff, v. CAMPBELL, et al., Defendants. Case No. 1:26-cv-00819-BAM (PC) ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADING (ECF No. 15) Plaintiff John David Salazar (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action proceeds on Plaintiff’s first amended complaint against Defendants Gonzalez and Campbell for unconstitutional conditions of confinement in violation of the Eighth Amendment. Pursuant to the Court’s August 13, 2026 order finding service of the first amended complaint appropriate and directing electronic service, Defendants’ answer or other responsive pleading is due on or before October 19, 2026. (See ECF Nos. 10, 12.) Currently before the Court is Defendants’ ex parte application requesting a 28-day extension of time to respond to the first amended complaint, filed October 14, 2026. (ECF No. 15.) Plaintiff has not yet had an opportunity to file a response, but the Court finds a response is unnecessary. The ex parte application is deemed submitted. Local Rules 144, 230(l). According to the declaration submitted in support of the application, counsel for Case 1:26-cv-00819-BAM Document 16 Filed 10/15/26 Page 1 of 2
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 Defendants was assigned this action on August 16, 2026. Since that time, counsel has commenced review of the case and requested documents from the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. (ECF No. 15 at 3, ¶¶ 4, 5.) Defense counsel indicates that more time is required to contact her clients and adequately investigate this case to prepare a responsive pleading. (Id. ¶ 6.) Counsel declares that good cause exists for the requested extension due to the press of other business. Counsel requires additional time to confer with Defendants, complete a factual investigation, and prepare a responsive pleading. (Id. ¶ 7.) Having considered the application, the Court finds good cause to grant the requested extension of time. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b). The Court also finds that Plaintiff will not be prejudiced by the brief extension of time granted here. A discovery and scheduling order has not been issued and there are no other deadlines pending in this action. Defendants are cautioned that further requests for extensions of time must be supported by a demonstrated showing of good cause, which will be narrowly construed. Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED as follows: 1. Defendants’ ex parte application for extension of time to file responsive pleading (ECF No. 15) is GRANTED. 2. Defendants shall file a response to the first amended complaint on or before November 16, 2026. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: October 15, 2026 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Case 1:26-cv-00819-BAM Document 16 Filed 10/15/26 Page 2 of 2
Was bedeutet dieser Text für Ihre Situation?
Kostenlose und unverbindliche Beratung
Schildern Sie uns Ihre Situation. Unser Team meldet sich per E-Mail bei Ihnen für Ihre Beratung.
Setzen Sie Ihre Recherche in ChatGPT oder Claude fort
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.