Renteria v. Matharu et al

Filing 26

ORDER Re Motion for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint; ORDER GRANTING Plaintiff's Request for Extension of Time 25 , FORTY-FIVE DAY DEADLINE for Plaintiff to File Second Amended Complaint, signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 2/4/2019. (Hellings, J)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

LUIS RENTERIA,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

vs.
KABIR MATHARU, et al.,

15

Defendants.

1:18-cv-00497-LJO-GSA-PC
ORDER RE MOTION FOR LEAVE TO
FILE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S
REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME
(ECF No. 25.)
FORTY-FIVE DAY DEADLINE FOR
PLAINTIFF TO FILE SECOND
AMENDED COMPLAINT

16
17
18
19

I.

BACKGROUND

20

Luis Renteria (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in

21

this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On April 12, 2018, Plaintiff filed the

22

Complaint commencing this case. (ECF No. 1.) On May 29, 2018, Plaintiff filed the First

23

Amended Complaint as a matter of course. (ECF No. 15.) On December 14, 2018, the court

24

issued a screening order dismissing the First Amended Complaint for violation of Local Rule

25

220 and failure to state a claim, with leave to amend within thirty days. (ECF No. 22.)

26

On January 31, 2019, Plaintiff filed a motion for leave to file a Second Amended

27

Complaint. (ECF No. 25.) Plaintiff also requested an extension of time to file a Second

28

Amended Complaint. (Id.)
1

1

II.

DISCUSSION

2

Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file a Second Amended Complaint is moot because the

3

court’s December 14, 2018 screening order dismissed Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint

4

with leave to amend within thirty days, (ECF No. 22), and on January 14, 2019, the court

5

granted Plaintiff an additional thirty days in which to file the Second Amended Complaint,

6

(ECF No. 24). Therefore, Plaintiff already has leave to file a Second Amended Complaint.

7

Plaintiff also requests an extension of time to file his Second Amended Complaint,

8

asserting that his medical condition makes it difficult for him to function. Plaintiff shows good

9

cause for an extension of time to file the Second Amended Complaint, which shall be granted.

10

III.

CONCLUSION

11

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

12

1.

Plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend is denied as moot;

13

2.

Plaintiff’s request for extension of time is granted; and

14

3.

Plaintiff is granted forty-five days from the date of service of this order in which

15

to file a Second Amended Complaint, pursuant to the court’s order issued on

16

December 14, 2018.

17
18
19
20

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

February 4, 2019

/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2