Ricks v. Kamena et al

Filing 28

ORDER Discharging 26 Order to Show Cause; ORDER Directing Defendant to File Response to Plaintiff's Motion to Continue Proceedings signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 06/21/2017. (Flores, E)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SCOTT K. RICKS, 12 13 14 15 Plaintiff, v. C. KAMENA, et al., Defendants. 16 Case No. 1:15-cv-00715-BAM (PC) ORDER DISCHARGING ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE (ECF No. 26) ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANT TO FILE RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO CONTINUE PROCEEDINGS TWENTY-ONE (21) DAY DEADLINE 17 18 Plaintiff Scott K. Ricks (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 19 pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On August 5, 2016, the Court 20 screened Plaintiff’s complaint and found that he had stated cognizable claims under the Eighth 21 Amendment against Defendant Kamena for the failure to protect him from his cellmate’s attack 22 on January 13, 2014, and for deliberate indifference to his serious medical need following the 23 attack. (ECF No. 18.) 24 On February 24, 2017, Plaintiff filed a motion to amend the complaint solely with respect 25 to damages. (ECF No. 24.) The Court granted the motion on April 19, 2017, and directed 26 Plaintiff to file an amended complaint limited to the revision of his damages claim. (ECF No. 27 25). Plaintiff failed to timely file an amended complaint. On June 6, 2017, the Court issued an 28 order to show cause why this action should not be dismissed for failure to obey a court order and 1 1 failure to prosecute. (ECF No. 26.) 2 On June 20, 2017, Plaintiff filed the instant motion to continue proceedings. (ECF No. 3 27.) Plaintiff states that on April 27, 2017, during his deposition in this case, Defendant’s counsel 4 acknowledged that Plaintiff had filed a timely motion to amend with respect to the amount of 5 damages. Plaintiff believed that because Defendant’s counsel had acknowledged his motion on 6 the record, he did not need to file an amended complaint. (Id.) Plaintiff further states that he was transferred to Salinas Valley State Prison (“SVSP”) on 7 8 February 1, 2016. Plaintiff alleges that SVSP has no print law library, no law books or legal 9 reference books, and refuses to supply any type of legal materials, including 28 lined paper and 10 pens. Plaintiff has filed multiple appeals regarding SVSP’s refusal to supply legal materials, and 11 every single one of the appeals was denied. Plaintiff states that he was only able to obtain fifty 12 pages of 28 lined paper by trading with another inmate, and thus has demonstrated that he has no 13 means to file a first amended complaint. Plaintiff requests that the Court proceed on the 14 cognizable claims of the complaint filed on April 26, 2015,1 and his motion to amend with respect 15 to damages, or to proceed solely on the original complaint. (Id.) The Court finds it appropriate for Defendant Kamena to file a response to Plaintiff’s 16 17 motion to continue proceedings. Local Rule 230(l). Accordingly, Defendant Kamena is 18 HEREBY ORDERED to file a response to Plaintiff’s motion to continue proceedings, (ECF No. 19 27), within twenty-one (21) days of the date of service of this order. Plaintiff’s reply, if any, 20 shall be filed within seven (7) days following the date of service of Defendant’s response. 21 22 IT IS SO ORDERED. 23 Dated: /s/ Barbara June 21, 2017 A. McAuliffe _ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 24 25 26 27 1 28 The Court notes that Plaintiff’s original complaint was signed and dated April 26, 2015, and docketed on May 8, 2015. (ECF No. 1.) 2

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?