(PC) Pavao v. Unknown

Filing 19

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 5/10/2022 DENYING plaintiff's 18 motion to "toll" or stay these proceedings. The first amended complaint shall be filed within 30 days. (Yin, K)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ENRICO PAVAO, 12 13 14 15 No. 2:21-cv-2082 TLN AC P Plaintiff, v. ORDER UNKNOWN, Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff, a pretrial detainee, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. 18 § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 19 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On May 2, 2022, plaintiff filed a motion to “toll” this case. ECF No. 18. As the motion 21 seeks to indefinitely suspend the deadline for filing an amended complaint, the court construes it 22 as a motion to stay the case. For the reasons stated below, plaintiff’s motion will be denied. 23 On January 13, 2022, the court screened plaintiff’s complaint and determined that it failed 24 to state a claim. ECF No. 9. Plaintiff was given thirty days to file an amended complaint. Id. at 25 10. Since then, plaintiff has requested and has been granted three thirty-day extensions of time. 26 ECF Nos. 12-17. The most recent extension of time was granted on May 2, 2022. ECF No. 17. 27 In that order, the court cautioned plaintiff that absent extraordinary circumstances, no further 28 extensions of time would be granted. Id. 1 1 In support of his request for a stay, plaintiff states that he is currently receiving mental 2 health care as an outpatient and does not have the mental capacity to make legal decisions. ECF 3 No. 18. He further asserts that staying this matter would not prejudice the defendants. Id. 1 4 Since the filing of this case, plaintiff has demonstrated a satisfactory understanding of the 5 purpose of this action as well as of the general rules of court. He understands that he is to file an 6 amended complaint, as evidenced by his three requests for an extension of time to do so, and his 7 filing of the instant motion requesting that this matter be stayed. See ECF Nos. 12, 14, 16, 18. 8 On screening, the court identified the complaint’s deficiencies in detail and provided guidance 9 regarding the law that governs plaintiff’s claims and the requirements for pleading. See ECF No. 10 9 at 3-10. For all these reasons, it does not appear that plaintiff is incapable of meeting Rule 8’s 11 requirement of providing a short and plain statement of his claims. See Fed. R. Civ. Proc., Rule 12 8(a)(2). Accordingly, plaintiff’s outpatient mental health treatment does not support an indefinite 13 stay of the proceedings. The court will provide a small amount of additional time for the filing of 14 the first amended complaint. 15 For the reasons explained above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 16 1. Plaintiff’s motion to “toll” or stay these proceedings (ECF No. 18) is DENIED, and 17 2. The first amended complaint shall be filed within thirty days of the service of this 18 order. 19 Plaintiff is warned that his failure to file an amended complaint within the time provided 20 will likely result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed without prejudice. 21 DATED: May 10, 2022 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 Plaintiff has not yet identified any defendants or stated any cognizable claims. It is impossible to evaluate prejudice to unknown defendants in relation to unknown claims. 2

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?