Luster v. Neven et al

Filing 17

ORDER that plaintiffs motion 16 for an enlargement of time is GRANTED, such that plaintiff shall have up to and including April 25, 2011, within which to mail an amended complaint to the Clerk for filing. No further requests for extension of time will be entertained. THIS IS THE FINAL EXTENSION OF THE DEADLINE. Signed by Judge Gloria M. Navarro on 4/22/11. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ECS)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6
7
8
GEORGE LUSTER,
9
Plaintiff,

2:10-cv-01661-GMN-PAL

10
vs.
11
ORDER
12

DWIGHT NEVEN, et al.

13

Defendants.

14
15

This removed pro se prisoner civil rights action comes before the Court on plaintiff’s

16

third motion (#16) for enlargement of time, in which he seeks an additional fourteen days to

17

file an amended complaint.

18

Petitioner maintains that he needs additional time because: (a) he allegedly had to

19

prepare a motion to reopen the habeas matter in No. 2:04-cv-00334-RLH-RJJ, “totaling 77

20

pages with exhibits,” after receiving the state supreme court’s order of affirmance on March

21

30, 2011; and (b) prison authorities allegedly have impeded his access to the law library.

22

Plaintiff is represented by appointed federal habeas counsel in No. 2:04-cv-00334.

23

The Court therefore ordered that his pro se motion to reopen be stricken from that record.

24

The Court further admonished plaintiff that if he continued to file papers pro se therein that

25

sanctions, including potentially dismissal, may be imposed. The Court additionally noted that

26

there was no valid reason for plaintiff to file the motion pro se rather than proceeding through

27

counsel because the deadline for filing the motion to reopen did not expire until May 27, 2011,

28

forty-five days after the issuance of the remittitur.

1

Plaintiff thus has had ample time and opportunity to file an amended complaint herein.

2

Any alleged interference with his law library access clearly has not caused him to be unable

3

to file an amended complaint herein, as he was able to file “77 pages with exhibits” in the

4

other action despite there being absolutely no need to do so. Put simply, if plaintiff had been

5

doing what he was supposed to be doing rather than what he was not, there would be no

6

need to request a further extension in this case.

7

The Court nonetheless will grant this, final, extension request. No further extension

8

requests will be entertained. If plaintiff fails to meet the deadline, the Court then will proceed

9

to appropriate action as to the pendent state law claims that remain.

10

IT THEREFORE IS ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion (#16) for an enlargement of time

11

is GRANTED, such that plaintiff shall have up to and including April 25, 2011, within which

12

to mail an amended complaint to the Clerk for filing. No further requests for extension of

13

time will be entertained. THIS IS THE FINAL EXTENSION OF THE DEADLINE.

14

DATED this 22nd day of April, 2011.

15
16
17
18

_________________________________
Gloria M. Navarro
United States District Judge

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-