Sands v. Smith, et al.

Filing 4

ORDER GRANTING Request for Screening Order; ORDER GRANTING Extension of Time to File Response to Complaint 2 , signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 11/21/14. (Martin-Gill, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

MICHAEL SANDS,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

1:14-cv-01780-GSA-PC
ORDER GRANTING REQUEST FOR
SCREENING ORDER

vs.
MARLENE SMITH, et al.,

15

Defendants.

ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF
TIME TO FILE RESPONSE TO
COMPLAINT
(Doc. 2.)

16
17

This is a civil action filed by Michael Sands (APlaintiff@), a state prisoner proceeding pro

18

se. This action was initiated by civil complaint filed by Plaintiff in the Kings County Superior

19

Court on July 30, 2014 (Case #14-C0226). On November 12, 2014, defendants Marlene

20

Robicheaux-Smith, Natalie Clark, and Antoneya Graves (“Defendants”) removed the case to

21

federal court by filing a Notice of Removal of Action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 1441(c). (Doc.

22

2.)

23

complaint under 28 U.S.C. ' 1915A and grant Defendants an extension of time in which to file

24

a responsive pleading. (Id. at 2:9-3:3.)

Within the Notice of Removal, Defendants requested the court to screen Plaintiff=s

25

The Court is required to screen complaints in civil actions in which a prisoner seeks

26

redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C.

27

' 1915A(a).

28

Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) at Corcoran State Prison in Corcoran,

Plaintiff=s complaint alleges that Defendants, employees of the California

1

1

California, violated his rights under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.

2

Because Plaintiff is a prisoner and Defendants were employees of the CDCR at a state prison

3

when the alleged events occurred, the court is required to screen the complaint. Therefore,

4

Defendants' motion for the Court to screen the complaint shall be granted. In addition, good

5

cause appearing, the motion for extension of time shall also be granted.

6

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

7

1.

8
9

Defendants' motion for the Court to screen the complaint is GRANTED, and the
court shall issue a screening order in due time;

2.

Defendants are GRANTED an extension of time until thirty days from the date

10

of service of the Court's screening order in which to file a response to the

11

complaint.

12
13
14
15

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

November 21, 2014

/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

16
17
18
19
20
21
22

23
24
25
26
27
28
2