Davis v. Kellar et al

Filing 64

MINUTE ORDER denying without prejudice 59 Motion for Extension of Time and Move for Leave to Amend His Pleading to State a FTCA Claim Under 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b)(1) §§2671 et seq. and 60 Motion for Appointment of Counsel andExtend time to File Certificate of Review Pursuant to Colo.Rev.Stat. 13-20-602 28 U.S.C. §1346(b)(1) §§2671 et seq.. By Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe on 8/21/2013. (klyon, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 12-cv-01060-MSK-MJW
JAMIE DAVIS,
Plaintiff(s),
v.
MARK KELLAR, Individually and in his official capacity as Health Services Administrator
at FCI Florence,
LISA MCDERMOTT, Individually and in her official capacity as Assistant Health
Services Administrator,
PETER BLUDWORTH, Associate Warden, Individually and in his official capacity,
DR. DAVID ALLRED, Individually and in his official capacity as Clinical Director at FCI
Florence,
DR. GEORGE SANTINI, Individually and in his official capacity as Staff Physician at FCI
Florence,
PA CARI RITTER, Individually and in her official capacity as mid-level provider at FCI
Florence,
PA A. VINYARD, Individually and in her official capacity as mid-level provider at FCI
Florecence,
MIKE GOODIN, Individually and in his official capacity as Chief Pharmacist at FCI
Florence,
GILBERTA TRUJILLO, Individually and in her official capacity as Medical Secretary,
and
RN S. HENDRICKS, Individually and in her official capacity as Registered Nurse at FCI
Florence,
Defendant(s).
MINUTE ORDER
Entered by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe
It is hereby ORDERED that the plaintiff’s Motion for Extension of Time and Move
for Leave to Amend His Pleading to State a FTCA Claim Under 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b)(1)
§§2671 et seq. (Docket No. 59) and plaintiff’s Motion for Appointment of Counsel and
Extend time to File Certificate of Review Pursuant to Colo.Rev.Stat. 13-20-602 28
U.S.C. §1346(b)(1) §§2671 et seq. (Docket No. 60) are both denied without prejudice
as premature.
As defendants correctly note (Docket No. 61), the court has not yet granted
plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint. This court has merely made a

2
recommendation to Chief Judge Krieger that the plaintiff be given an opportunity to
move for leave to amend his pleading. (Docket No. 55 at 21).
Date: August 21, 2013