Cox v. Narkiewicz

Opinion

THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 8 AT SEATTLE 9 JOHN LESTER COX, CASE NO. C19-1486-JCC 10 Plaintiff, MINUTE ORDER 11 v. 12 MIRA NARKIEWICZ, et al., 13 Defendants. 14

15 The following Minute Order is made by direction of the Court, the Honorable John C. 16 Coughenour, United States District Judge: 17 This matter comes before the Court on Mr. Cox’s motion for extension of time to object 18 to the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 46). Mr. Cox requests that the Court extend his 19 deadline to object to the R&R until May 31, 2021. (Id. at 3.) Defendants do not oppose. (Dkt. 20 No. 47 at 1.) Thus, having considered the motion and the relevant record and finding good cause, 21 the Court GRANTS the motion and EXTENDS Mr. Cox’s deadline to object to the Report and 22 Recommendation until May 31, 2021. 23 Because Mr. Cox’s motion is unopposed, the Court need not address the parties’ varying 24 contentions regarding Mr. Cox’s access to the Law Library. Should Mr. Cox seek an additional 25 extension, and should Defendants oppose that request, the Court will scrutinize Mr. Cox’s access 26 to the Law Library in more depth. Mr. Cox requests that the Court advise what the Court 1 “considers meaningful access” to legal materials. (Dkt. No. 46 at 3.) The Court will not issue an 2 advisory opinion on that matter in a motion for extension of time to object to the R&R. If Mr. 3 Cox believes that he has been unconstitutionally denied access to legal materials, he must 4 address that issue in a separate proceeding. See Bounds v. Smith, 430 U.S. 817 (1977); Lewis v. 5 Casey, 518 U.S. 343 (1996). 6 DATED this 10th day of May 2021. 7 William M. McCool Clerk of Court 8 s/Paula McNabb 9 Deputy Clerk 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26