Pagtakhan et al v. Burlingame Police Department et al

Filing 30

ORDER LIFTING STAY, RE-OPENING ACTION, AND SETTING DEADLINE FOR AMENDED COMPLAINT 29 (Illston, Susan) (Filed on 8/2/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

MARLON E. PAGTAKHAN,

11

Plaintiff,

12
13

No. C 08-2188 SI (pr)
ORDER LIFTING STAY, REOPENING ACTION, AND SETTING
DEADLINE FOR AMENDED
COMPLAINT

v.
JOHN DOE, detective; et al.,

14

Defendants.
/

15
16
17

On September 29, 2008, this action was stayed and administratively closed because

18

plaintiff's claims called into question the validity of an ongoing criminal case (including

19

competency proceedings) against plaintiff. See Docket # 11.

20

Recently, plaintiff moved to lift the stay and requested leave to amend his complaint.

21

Docket # 29. In his motion, plaintiff stated that the reason for the stay no longer exists because

22

the criminal charges against him were dismissed. Upon due consideration, plaintiff's motion to

23

lift the stay is GRANTED. (Docket # 29.) The stay is lifted and the clerk will re-open the case

24

file.

25

Plaintiff also requested leave to file an amended complaint. The request is GRANTED.

26

The amended complaint must be filed no later than September 7, 2012. Although plaintiff

27

requested sixty days to prepare an amended complaint, that is an unnecessarily long amount of

28

time in light of the fact that plaintiff is no longer in custody. Plaintiff should re-read the Order

1

To Stay Proceedings and Administratively Close the Case (Docket # 11) because that order

2

discusses several problems in his original complaint.

3
4

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: August 2, 2012

_______________________
SUSAN ILLSTON
United States District Judge

5
6
7
8
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

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