Zambrano v. Golding

Background

Juan Carlos Zambrano, an inmate at Pelican Bay State Prison, brought this civil-rights action without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He alleges that prison correctional officials were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs, violating the Eighth Amendment.

The defendants filed a motion for summary judgment on August 13, 2020. Summary judgment is a request for a decision based on the record without a trial. The court had already granted Zambrano three extensions, through April 16, 2021, to oppose that motion. Zambrano then filed a letter asking for another extension, stating that he did not learn about the third extension until he received the defendants’ reply and that COVID-19 had affected prison operations and access to the law library.

Ruling

The court granted Zambrano’s fourth and final extension, giving him until July 15, 2021, to file his opposition to the summary-judgment motion. The court stated that no further extensions would be granted for any reason.

If Zambrano did not file an opposition by July 15, the motion would be considered fully submitted on that date, and the court would decide it using the record then before the court. If he filed an opposition on time, the defendants could file an additional reply within 14 days after the opposition was filed, and the motion would be considered fully submitted when that reply was filed.

Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. reminded Zambrano that he was responsible for prosecuting the case and complying with court orders. The court warned that failing to prosecute the case or meet the order’s deadlines could result in dismissal for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). The order terminated docket entry 43. It did not decide the underlying civil-rights claims or the pending summary-judgment motion.