Adams

(PC) Perkins v. Adams

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaFebruary 6, 20202:16-cv-01791California422 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 RANDY PERKINS, No. 2:16-cv-01791-JAM-CKD Plaintiff, v. ORDER A. ADAMS, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a state inmate proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this federal civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On September 26, 2019 this court issued a further scheduling order requiring plaintiff and defendant Adams to file pretrial statements on or before December 11, 2019 and December 27, 2019, respectively. ECF No. 58. Plaintiff failed to submit a pretrial statement and, as a result, defendant Adams filed a motion to modify the scheduling order. ECF No. 61. On December 27, 2019, the undersigned issued Findings and Recommendations that this action be dismissed based on plaintiff’s failure to file his pretrial statement. ECF No. 62. After the Findings and Recommendations had issued, plaintiff filed a motion for an extension of time to file his pretrial statement. ECF No. 63.1 …

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.