Hosey

(PC) Beavers v. Hosey

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaFebruary 20, 20251:21-cv-00650California603 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 GARY LEE BEAVERS, Case No. 1:21-cv-00650-HBK (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER FINDING MOOT PLAINTIFF’S

CONSTRUED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF

v. TIME TO FILE RULE 59 MOTION

OFFICER HOSEY, OFFICER (Doc. No. 46) MENDOZA, and OFFICER ESPINOSA, 15 Defendants. 16 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for extension of time filed February 11, 2025. (Doc. No. 46, “Motion”). Plaintiff seeks an extension of time, until February 24, 2025, to file objections pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72 to the undersigned’s January 29, 2024 Order granting Defendants Mendoza and Espinoza’s exhaustion-based motion for summary judgment. Because the parties consented to U.S. Magistrate Judge jurisdiction, the Court construes Plaintiff’s Motion as a motion for extension of time to file a motion for reconsideration under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e). Plaintiff may seek reconsideration of the Court’s January 29, 2025 Order under either 25…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.