Marshall v. Alameda County Sheriff's Department

Filing 9

ORDER by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers granting in part and denying in part 8 Motion for Extension of Time to Amend 1 Complaint. Plaintiff to file amended complaint by 4/5/2013. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service) (fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/30/2013)

1
2
3
4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

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

10

No. C 12-02849 YGR (PR)

ALEXANDER MARSHALL,
Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND
DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF'S
REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION OF
TIME TO FILE AMENDED
COMPLAINT

vs.
ALAMEDA COUNTY JAIL,
Defendant.

11

/

12

Plaintiff filed this pro se civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

13

In an Order dated December 5, 2012, the Court dismissed Plaintiff's complaint with leave to

14

amend. The Court granted Plaintiff thirty days from the date of that Order to file an amended

15

complaint. Plaintiff's amended complaint was due on January 4, 2013; however, to date he has not

16

filed his amended complaint.

17

Plaintiff has filed a request for an extension of time of "one year" in which to file his

18

amended complaint on the grounds that he will be released from jail on March 18, 2013 and that he

19

"need[s] to wait for [his] release and book a court date in the superior court to formally request the

20

Sheriff Department Classification and Costody [sic] records for [him]self . . . ." (Pl.'s Mot. for EOT

21

at 1.) He adds that he needs the extension in order to determine the dates of the alleged

22

constitutional violations and to "provide the names of the Sgt. and Captains" involved and "hold

23

them accountable." (Id. at 2.) Having read and considered Plaintiff's request,

24

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's request for an extension of time is GRANTED in

25

part and DENIED in part. Plaintiff was initially given thirty days to amend his complaint, which

26

should have given him ample opportunity to meet this deadline. The Court finds that a one-year

27

extension is not warranted, but instead it will grant Plaintiff a ninety-one-day extension. Plaintiff

28

shall file his amended complaint on or by April 5, 2013.

1

This Order terminates Docket no. 8.

2

IT IS SO ORDERED.

3
DATED:

January 30, 2013

4

YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 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

G:\PRO-SE\YGR\CR.12\Marshall2849.grantEOTamend.wpd

2