Ingram

(PC) Taylor v. Ingram

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMay 8, 20232:21-cv-01042California1,269 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 KENNETH LEE TAYLOR, No. 2:21-cv-01042 TLN DB P Plaintiff, v. ORDER MARSHA INGRAM, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff Kenneth Lee Taylor is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff claims that defendant retaliated against him in violation of his First Amendment Rights. Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment alleging plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies as to some of his cognizable claims. (ECF No. 26.) Plaintiff requested and was granted a forty-five-day extension of time to file an opposition to the summary judgment motion. (ECF Nos. 27, 29.) Thereafter, defendant filed a motion to compel alleging plaintiff has failed to respond to any of defendant’s discovery requests. (ECF No. 30.) Counsel for defendant filed a declaration along with the motion to compel which states that plaintiff was served with interrogatories,…

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.