Wolfe v. Stanislaus County, et al.

Filing 25

ORDER Granting Plaintiff's Second Motion for Extension of Time to File Amended Complaint, signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 2/11/19. Amended Complaint Due Within 45-Days. (Gonzalez, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

WADE WOLFE,

12
13
14

Case No. 1:18-cv-00570-BAM (PC)
Plaintiff,

v.
STANISLAUS COUNTY, et al.,

15

Defendants.

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S SECOND
MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO
FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT
(ECF No. 24)
FORTY-FIVE (45) DAY DEADLINE

16
17
18

Plaintiff Wade Wolfe (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma
pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

19

On December 28, 2018, the Court issued a screening order granting Plaintiff an

20

opportunity to file an amended complaint within thirty days. (ECF No. 21.) That deadline was

21

extended by thirty days on January 29, 2019. (ECF No. 23.) Currently before the Court is

22

Plaintiff’s second motion for an extension of time to file his first amended complaint. (ECF No.

23

24.) Plaintiff states that he was transferred from California Medical Facility to the California

24

Health Care Facility, and requests an extension of forty-five days to file his first amended

25

complaint. (Id.)

26

The Court finds good cause for the requested extension of time. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b).

27

Plaintiff is reminded that his amended complaint should be brief, Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a), but it must

28

state what each named defendant did that led to the deprivation of Plaintiff’s constitutional rights,
1

1

Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678-79. Although accepted as true, the “[f]actual allegations must be

2

[sufficient] to raise a right to relief above the speculative level . . . .” Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555

3

(citations omitted).

4

Additionally, Plaintiff may not change the nature of this suit by adding new, unrelated

5

claims in his first amended complaint. George v. Smith, 507 F.3d 605, 607 (7th Cir. 2007) (no

6

“buckshot” complaints).

7

Finally, Plaintiff is advised that an amended complaint supersedes the original complaint.

8

Lacey v. Maricopa Cty., 693 F.3d 896, 927 (9th Cir. 2012). Therefore, Plaintiff’s amended

9

complaint must be “complete in itself without reference to the prior or superseded pleading.”

10

Local Rule 220. This includes any exhibits or attachments Plaintiff wishes to incorporate by

11

reference.

12

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

13

1.

Plaintiff’s second motion for extension of time, (ECF No. 24), is GRANTED;

14

2.

Plaintiff shall file a first amended complaint (or a notice of voluntary dismissal

15

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i)) within forty-five (45) days from the

16

date of service of this order; and

17
18

3.

If Plaintiff fails to file a first amended complaint in compliance with this

order, this action will be dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to obey a court order.

19
20
21

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Barbara

February 11, 2019

A. McAuliffe

_

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2