Atcherley v. Clark et al

Filing 18

ORDER Regarding Plaintiff's 17 Motion for Clarification signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 11/27/2013. (Flores, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9
10
11

WILLIAM ATCHERLEY,

12
13
14
15

Plaintiff,
vs.
EDGAR CLARK, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

1:12cv00225 DLB PC
ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION
(Document 17)

16
17

Plaintiff William Atcherley (“Plaintiff”) is a prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

18

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed his complaint on

19

February 17, 2012. On February 19, 2013, the Court ordered Plaintiff to either file an amended

20
21
22

complaint or notify the Court of his willingness to proceed only on the cognizable claims.
On March 14, 2013, Plaintiff filed his First Amended Complaint (“FAC”). The Court
screened Plaintiff’s FAC on November 13, 2013, and found certain claims cognizable. By

23

separate order, Plaintiff was instructed to submit service documents.
24
25
26
27

On November 25, 2013, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting clarification of the Court’s
order. It appears that in the text of the order, the Court determined that Plaintiff stated a claim
against Defendant Clark for violation of the Eighth Amendment based on his refusal to order

28
1

1
2

more frequent bandage changes. In the conclusion of the order, however, the Court inadvertently
omitted Defendant Clark from the Eighth Amendment claim.

3
4

Plaintiff is informed that, pursuant to the text of the order, Defendant Clark IS included
in the Eighth Amendment claim. By separate order, the Court will issue an amended screening

5

order to clarify the error.
6
7
8

IT IS SO ORDERED.

9

Dated:

10

/s/ Dennis

November 27, 2013

L. Beck

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
11
12

DEAC_Signature-END:

9b0hied

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2