Clark v. Brown et al

Filing 6

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT. Signed by Judge Beth Labson Freeman on 5/9/2022. Amended Pleadings due by 6/1/2022. (tsh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/9/2022)Any non-CM/ECF Participants have been served by First Class Mail to the addresses of record listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF)

Download PDF
Case 5:21-cv-09230-BLF Document 6 Filed 05/09/22 Page 1 of 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 ALPHONSO RAMON CLARK, Plaintiff, 12 13 14 15 v. Case No. 21-09230 BLF (PR) ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT DR. MOLLY BROWN, et al., Defendants. 16 (Docket No. 5) 17 18 Plaintiff, a state prisoner currently housed at Napa State Hospital, filed a pro se civil 19 rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Dkt. No. 1. On April 5, 2022, the Court 20 dismissed the complaint with leave to amend. Dkt. No. 3. Plaintiff was directed to file an 21 amended complaint within twenty-eight days from the date the order was filed, i.e., no 22 later than May 3, 2022. Id. 23 On April 29, 2022, Plaintiff filed a letter requesting an extension of time to file an 24 amended complaint, which the court construes as a motion for an extension of time. Dkt. 25 No. 5. The timely filed request is GRANTED. Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint 26 using the court’s form complaint to attempt to correct the deficiencies in the original 27 complaint no later than June 1, 2022. 28 The amended complaint must include the caption and civil case number used in this Case 5:21-cv-09230-BLF Document 6 Filed 05/09/22 Page 2 of 2 1 order, i.e., Case No. C 21-09230 BLF (PR), and the words “AMENDED COMPLAINT” 2 on the first page. Plaintiff must answer all the questions on the form in order for the action 3 to proceed. Plaintiff is reminded that the amended complaint supersedes the original, and 4 Plaintiff may not make references to the original complaint. Claims not included in the 5 amended complaint are no longer claims and defendants not named in an amended 6 complaint are no longer defendants. See Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1262 (9th 7 Cir.1992). 8 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 Failure to respond in accordance with this order by filing an amended complaint in the time provided will result in the dismissal of this action without prejudice and without further notice to Plaintiff. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: ___May 9, 2022___________ ________________________ BETH LABSON FREEMAN United States District Judge 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Order Granting Mot. for EOT to File Am. Compl. PRO-SE\BLF\CR.21\09230Clark_eot-ac 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?