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