Santos Valenzuela v. Smith et al

Filing 31

ORDER VACATING November 13, 2018 29 Findings and Recommendations, and GRANTING Plaintiff Thirty Days to File an Amended Complaint, signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 11/15/18. (Marrujo, C)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

SANTOS VALENZUELA,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

v.
SMITH, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
17
18
19

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 1:17-cv-01440-LJO-SAB (PC)
ORDER VACATING NOVEMBER 13, 2018
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, AND
GRANTING PLAINTIFF THIRTY DAYS TO FILE
AN AMENDED COMPLAINT
[ECF Nos. 29, 30]

Plaintiff Santos Valenzuela is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

20

On November 2, 2017, the Court found that Plaintiff’s complaint failed to state a cognizable

21

claim for relief and granted plaintiff thirty days to file an amended complaint addressing the

22

deficiencies identified by the Court. (ECF No. 15.) On November 28, 2017, at Plaintiff’s request, the

23

Court granted Plaintiff an additional thirty days to file an amended complaint. (ECF No. 16, 17.)

24

After more than thirty days passed, on January 4, 2018, the Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause why

25

the action should not be dismissed for failure to comply with a court order. (ECF No. 18.) Plaintiff

26

failed to respond to the Court’s order.

27

///

28

///
1

Therefore, on January 31, 2018, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendations

1
2

recommending that the action be dismissed for failure to comply with a court order. (ECF No. 19.)

3

The Findings and Recommendations were served on Plaintiff and contained notice that objections

4

were to be filed within fourteen days.

5

Recommendations were adopted in full on March 22, 2018, and the action was dismissed. (ECF No.

6

21.)

Plaintiff did not file objections, and the Findings and

On August 6, 2018, Plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration. (ECF No. 23.) Plaintiff

7
8

requested the Court to reopen the action because he had been undergoing mental health treatment and

9

had been transferred to multiple different facilities and denied access to the court and his legal

10

materials. (ECF. No. 21.) As a result, Plaintiff claimed he was unable to respond to the Court’s

11

orders. (Id.) On August 8, 2018, the undersigned granted Plaintiff’s request to reopen the action, and

12

directed Plaintiff to file an amended complaint within thirty days. (ECF No. 24.)
On August 31, 2018, and October 5, 2018, the Court granted Plaintiff thirty additional days to

13
14

file the amended complaint, resulting in a deadline of November 5, 2018. (ECF Nos. 26, 28.) Plaintiff

15

failed to file an amended complaint on or before November 5, 2018. Therefore, on November 13,

16

2018, the undersigned issued Findings and Recommendations recommending that the action be

17

dismissed. (ECF No. 29.) On this same date, Plaintiff filed a motion for an extension of time to file

18

an amended complaint, which was placed on the docket after the issuance of the Findings and

19

Recommendations. (ECF No. 30.) In his motion, Plaintiff submits that on November 1, 2018, he was

20

transferred to the California Health Care Facility in Stockton, and is without his legal materials. (Id.)

21

On the basis of good cause, the Court will vacate the November 13, 2018 Findings and

22

Recommendations and grant Plaintiff thirty additional days to file an amended complaint.

23

///

24

///

25

///

26

///

27

///

28

///
2

1

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

2

1.

3

VACATED; and

4

2.

5

The Findings and Recommendations issued on November 13, 2018 (ECF No. 29), are

Plaintiff is granted thirty days from the date of service of this order to file an amended

complaint in compliance with the Court’s November 2, 2017 screening order.

6
7

IT IS SO ORDERED.

8

Dated:

9

November 15, 2018
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3