Cochran v. Wardian et al

Filing 8

ORDER denying as moot 5 Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Amend the Complaint. Signed by Judge Robert C Broomfield on 2/6/12.(LSP)

1

WO

2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9
10
11

Howard Cochran,

12
Plaintiff,
13
vs.
14
15

Mark Wardian, et al.,

16
Defendants.
17
18

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. CV 11-2538-PHX-RCB(JFM)
ORDER

19
20

Plaintiff Howard Cochran filed a pro se civil rights Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C.

21

§ 1983. In an Order filed on February 1, 2012, the Court dismissed the Complaint for failure

22

to state a claim with leave to file a First Amended Complaint. (Doc. 6.) Shortly before that

23

Order was filed, Plaintiff filed a motion for leave to amend the Complaint. (Doc. 5.)

24

Plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend the Complaint will be denied as moot because he was

25

granted leave to file an amended complaint in the February 1, 2012 Order.

26

Warnings

27

A.

Release

28

Plaintiff must pay the unpaid balance of the filing fee within 120 days of his release.

1

Also, within 30 days of his release, he must either (1) notify the Court that he intends to pay

2

the balance or (2) show good cause, in writing, why he cannot. Failure to comply may result

3

in dismissal of this action.

4

B.

5

Plaintiff must file and serve a notice of a change of address in accordance with Rule

6

83.3(d) of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff must not include a motion for other

7

relief with a notice of change of address. Failure to comply may result in dismissal of this

8

action.

9

C.

Address Changes

Copies

10

Plaintiff must submit an additional copy of every filing for use by the Court. See

11

LRCiv 5.4. Failure to comply may result in the filing being stricken without further notice

12

to Plaintiff.

13

D.

Possible “Strike”

14

Because the Complaint has been dismissed for failure to state a claim, if Plaintiff fails

15

to file an amended complaint correcting the deficiencies identified in the February 1, 2012

16

Order, the dismissal may count as a “strike” under the “3-strikes” provision of 28 U.S.C.

17

§ 1915(g). Under the 3-strikes provision, a prisoner may not bring a civil action or appeal

18

a civil judgment in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 “if the prisoner has, on 3 or more

19

prior occasions, while incarcerated or detained in any facility, brought an action or appeal

20

in a court of the United States that was dismissed on the grounds that it is frivolous,

21

malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, unless the prisoner is

22

under imminent danger of serious physical injury.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

23

E.

24

If Plaintiff fails to timely comply with every provision of the February 1, 2012 Order,

25

and these warnings, the Court may dismiss this action without further notice. See Ferdik,

26

963 F.2d at 1260-61 (a district court may dismiss an action for failure to comply with any

27

order of the Court).

28

Possible Dismissal

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend the Complaint is denied
-2-

1
2

as moot. (Doc. 5.)
DATED this 6th day of February, 2012.

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-3-