White v. Leavitt et al

Filing 41

ORDER granting 39 Motion for Clarification. The answer to White's request for clarification is no; White may not add claims, allegations, and defendants related to those additional events. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the 40 Motion to Extend Time is GRANTED in part. White's 9/10/2020 deadline to file the 38 amended complaint is extended to 9/17/2020. Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 8/17/2020. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - HAM)

Case 2:18-cv-00008-JAD-BNW Document 41 Filed 08/17/20 Page 1 of 2

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3
Toney Anthoney White,

Case No.: 2:18-cv-00008-JAD-BNW

4
Plaintiff
5
v.

Order Re: Requests for Clarification
and Extension of Time

6
Carey,
7

[ECF Nos. 39, 40]
Defendant

8
9

On August 10, 2020, I entered a comprehensive order that granted plaintiff Toney

10 Anthoney White the opportunity to amend his complaint to allege all claims against all
11 defendants that arise out of the threat that he claims Dean posed to him. White responded with a
12 motion asking the court to clarify whether the scope of this ability to amend includes the “host of
13 additional events” he sought to include, such as “claims based on medical indifference in delay
14 in failing to treat a broken bone resulting from a fight connected to the threat, post-bone-break
15 treatment by certain defendants and failure to adhere to bone specialists[’] orders, retaliation for
16 plaintiff[’]s complaints regarding staff’s indifference to the threats and a cover-up; prolonged
17 retaliatory solidarity confinement and policies which pertain.” 1
The court GRANTS that motion for clarification [ECF No. 39] 2 and states that the

18

19 answer to White’s request for clarification is no; White may not add claims, allegations,
20
1

21

2

ECF No. 39.

White is cautioned that the court will typically deny motions for clarification when the answer
to the question is clear in the court’s record, as the scope of his right to amend is in the August
22
10th order here. With hundreds of pending motions, the court does not have the luxury to
respond to such questions. In an effort to move this case forward, however, and to avoid a
23
bloated amended complaint, the court prioritized this request; it will likely not do so in the
future.

Case 2:18-cv-00008-JAD-BNW Document 41 Filed 08/17/20 Page 2 of 2

1 and defendants related to those additional events. As I explained in the August 10, 2020,
2 order, the court perceives these additional events and factual bases to be “new and unrelated
3 factual situations” that “do not arise out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of
4 transactions or occurrences. . . .” 3 “If White desires to proceed with the claims arising from
5 those new events, actions, and inaction, he must do so in a new, separate case (or depending on
6 which defendants are impacted by those claims, several new, separate lawsuits) in which he must
7 file a new application to proceed in forma pauperis.” 4
8

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that White’s motion to extend time to file the amended

9 complaint that the court authorized in the August 10, 2020, order [ECF No. 40] is GRANTED
10 in part. White did not show good cause why he needs 45 days from clarification to file his
11 amended complaint when the court originally granted just 30. However, the court finds it
12 appropriate to run the 30 days from the date of the instant order. Accordingly, White’s
13 September 10, 2020, deadline to file the amended complaint [ECF No. 38] is extended to
14 September 17, 2020.
15

_________________________________
U.S. District Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey
Dated: August 17, 2020

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

3

ECF No. 38 at 3–5.

4

Id. at 5.
2