Thomas v. Andrews et al
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 10/1/2010 requiring Plaintiff to provide further reponse re 26 MOTION to DISMISS. Respone due by 10/25/2010. (Lundstrom, T)
(PC) Thomas v. Andrews et al
1 2 3 4 5 6 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 9 10 11 12 Defendants. 13 / 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
RODNEY B. THOMAS, Plaintiff, v.
CASE NO. 1:09-CV-01593-DLB PC ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO PROVIDE FURTHER RESPONSE (DOC. 26)
TAFT CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, et al.,
RESPONSE DUE OCTOBER 25, 2010
Plaintiff Rodney B. Thomas ("Plaintiff") is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Fed. Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), which provides a remedy for civil rights violations by federal actors. Pending before the Court is Plaintiff's request to dismiss all federal defendants in this action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1). (Doc. 26.) Plaintiff has also indicated that he wishes to file an amended complaint in this action. (Doc. 25.) The Court set a deadline of October 25, 2010 for Plaintiff to file his amended complaint. There is thus a dispute in Plaintiff's filings. Accordingly, if Plaintiff wishes to voluntarily dismiss this action, Plaintiff shall so notify the Court on or before October 25, 2010. If Plaintiff wishes to file an amended complaint, Plaintiff is ordered to do so by October 25, 2010. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: 77e0d6
October 1, 2010
/s/ Dennis L. Beck UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?