Ramirez v. Duffy

Filing 28

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 3/24/2017 DENYING plaintiff's 27 request to suspend this action. (Yin, K)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
JUAN RAZO RAMIREZ,

No. 2:16-cv-0234 KJN P

12
Plaintiff,
13
v.

ORDER

14
BRIAN DUFFY, et al.,
15
Defendants.
16
17
18

Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding pro se. Plaintiff consented to proceed before the

19

undersigned for all purposes. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). On February 6, 2017, plaintiff filed a

20

request to suspend this action in light of his recent transfer. However, plaintiff’s filing is not

21

signed or dated. Plaintiff previously filed a document that was not signed or dated and plaintiff

22

was advised on August 11, 2016, that Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires

23

that all filings by pro se litigants must be signed by the litigant. (ECF No. 20 at 1.) Therefore,

24

plaintiff’s request is denied without prejudice. Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(a).

25

Moreover, this action was terminated on January 20, 2017, based on plaintiff’s failure to

26

file an amended complaint. Plaintiff’s original complaint was dismissed on June 30, 2016, and he

27

was granted numerous extensions of time in which to file an amended complaint. Despite

28

multiple opportunities, plaintiff did not file an amended complaint. Therefore, plaintiff should
1

1

not renew his request to suspend this action because this action is closed. No further filings

2

should be made in this closed case.

3

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s request to suspend this action

4

(ECF No. 27) is denied. Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(a).

5

Dated: March 24, 2017

6
7
8
/rami0234.sus

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2