Shetty v. Alphabet Yahoo Google et al

Filing 16

ORDER by Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong granting 14 Plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Time to Amend Complaint 1 Complain. Amended Pleadings due by 4/7/2017. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/28/2017)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
6

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
7

OAKLAND DIVISION
8
9

SHRUTI SHETTY,

Case No: C 17-00589 SBA

10

Plaintiff,
11

vs.

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S
REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF
TIME TO AMEND COMPLAINT

12

ALPHABET, et al.,

Dkt. 14

13

Defendants.
14
15

Plaintiff Shruti Shetty (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis,

16

initiated the instant action on February 3, 2017. Dkt. 1. On February 27, 2017, the Court

17

issued an Order Dismissing Plaintiff’s Complaint with Leave to Amend (“Order”). Dkt. 10.

18

The Court afforded Plaintiff until March 20, 2017, to file an amended complaint. Id. at 5.

19

The Court cautioned, “Failure to file an amended complaint by this deadline may result in

20

the dismissal of the action in its entirety without further leave to amend.” Id. at 6.

21

On March 27, 2017, Plaintiff filed the instant Request for Extension in Time to

22

Submit Amended Complaint. Dkt. 14.1 She requests a “few additional days” to amend her

23

complaint. Id. at 2. Plaintiff asserts that an extension is necessary due to: (1) “increased

24

stress from filing multiple complaints and orders through 5 cases simultaneously filed [by

25

her] in the last 1-2 months”; (2) the need to study “multiple legal subjects outside the scope

26

of [her] work and knowledge”; and (3) her illness in early January and again in the first

27

week of February. Id. at 1-2.

28

1

The Court notes that Plaintiff mailed the request on March 20, 2017.

1

The Court finds the asserted justifications for an extension largely unpersuasive.

2

First, given that the Court issued its Order on February 27, Plaintiff’s illnesses in early

3

January and the first week of February are irrelevant. While Plaintiff suggests her illnesses

4

may have prevented her from filing an original complaint sufficient to withstand dismissal,

5

that has no bearing on her ability to draft an amended complaint. Second, although

6

Plaintiff may be managing deadlines in multiple actions, she has chosen to initiate these

7

suits and must comply with typical litigation deadlines. See Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52,

8

54 (9th Cir. 1995) (“Although we construe pleadings liberally in their favor, pro se litigants

9

are bound by the rules of procedure.”) Finally, while the Court appreciates that Plaintiff

10

may not be versed in the law, the Court already took that into account when it afforded her

11

21 days to amend her complaint.

12

Despite the foregoing, the Court will grant Plaintiff a brief extension of time to file

13

an amended complaint. The Court notes that Plaintiff waited until the amendment deadline

14

to request an extension. As a result, eight days have already elapsed since the amendment

15

deadline. Taking this into account, the Court will afford Plaintiff an additional seven days

16

to amend her complaint, with three additional days for service of the instant order by mail.

17

Accordingly, Plaintiff shall file her amended complaint by no later than Friday, April

18

7, 2017. The Court warns Plaintiff that failure to file an amended complaint by this

19

deadline WILL RESULT IN THE DISMISSAL OF THE ACTION IN ITS

20

ENTIRETY WITHOUT FURTHER LEAVE TO AMEND.

21
22

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: 3/28/17

______________________________
SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG
Senior United States District Judge

23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-