From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hagan v. Bluman

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jul 31, 2017
Case No.: 3:16-cv-02976-LAB-JLB (S.D. Cal. Jul. 31, 2017)

Opinion

Case No.: 3:16-cv-02976-LAB-JLB

07-31-2017

KEVIN HAGAN, CDCR#AM-6145 Plaintiff, v. SCOTT MICHAEL BLUMAN; CHARLES CHILDERS; SCOTTY ELECTRIC CO.; KATHY BURGESS, Defendant.


ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

[ECF No. 5]

I. Procedural History

On December 5, 2016, Plaintiff filed his civil rights Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (ECF No. 1.) The Court conducted the required sua sponte screening and dismissed Plaintiff's Complaint for failing to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. (See ECF No. 3.) Plaintiff was granted forty-five (45) days leave from February 28, 2017 to file an amended complaint in order to correct the deficiencies of pleading identified by the Court. (Id.) However, Plaintiff did not file an amended complaint within that time frame. Instead, on June 6, 2017, Plaintiff filed a "Motion and Request for Leave to File an Amended Complaint" which the Court construes as a motion for extension of time to file an amended pleading.

II. Motion for Extension of Time

In Plaintiff's latest Motion, he claims that he has not been allowed access to the prison law library. (ECF No. 5 at 2.) Based on these allegations, the Court will provide Plaintiff with an additional sixty (60) days in which to file a First Amended Complaint. "'Strict time limits ... ought not to be insisted upon' where restraints resulting from a pro se ... plaintiff's incarceration prevent timely compliance with court deadlines." Eldridge v. Block, 832 F.2d 1132, 1136 (9th Cir. 1987) (citing Tarantino v. Eggers, 380 F.2d 465, 468 (9th Cir. 1967).

III. Conclusion

The Court GRANTS Plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Time to File First Amended Complaint. (ECF No. 5.) Plaintiff is GRANTED sixty (60) days leave from the date this Order is signed in which to file a First Amended Complaint which cures all the deficiencies of pleading noted in the Court's February 28, 2017 Order. If Plaintiff fails to file an amended pleading within this time frame, the Court will issue a final Order of dismissal.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: July 31, 2017

/s/_________

Hon. Larry Alan Burns

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Hagan v. Bluman

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jul 31, 2017
Case No.: 3:16-cv-02976-LAB-JLB (S.D. Cal. Jul. 31, 2017)
Case details for

Hagan v. Bluman

Case Details

Full title:KEVIN HAGAN, CDCR#AM-6145 Plaintiff, v. SCOTT MICHAEL BLUMAN; CHARLES…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Jul 31, 2017

Citations

Case No.: 3:16-cv-02976-LAB-JLB (S.D. Cal. Jul. 31, 2017)