Opinion
1:22-cv-00147-JHR
03-29-2022
CLAUDIA DAIGLE, Plaintiff, v. FRANCIS J. MATHEW, et al., Defendants.
ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF TIME
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on pro se Plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Time to Amend, Doc. 12, filed March 28, 2022.
The Court notified Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, that: (i) The relief Plaintiff seeks pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 appears to be barred by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine; (ii) Plaintiff has not established standing to challenge N.M. Stat. Ann. 3-18-32(b); (iii) The Complaint fails to state a conspiracy claim pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3); and (iv) The Complaint fails to state a claim against the 93 Owner Defendants. See Order to Show Cause, Doc. 11, filed March 11, 2022. The Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause why the claims in her Complaint should not be dismissed and that if Plaintiff asserts that any claims should not be dismissed, she must file an amended complaint with factual allegations that state a claim over which the Court has jurisdiction.
Plaintiff then filed her "Motion for Extension of Time to Amend" which is now before the Court. The document that Plaintiff filed, however, is not a motion for an extension of time to file an amended complaint; it appears to be a copy of her Verified Complaint, Doc. 1, filed February 25, 2022. Because Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and filed the document as a "Motion for Extension of Time to Amend," the Court grants Plaintiff an extension of time to respond to the Order to Show Cause.
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiffs Motion for Extension of Time to Amend, Doc. 12, filed March 28, 2022, is GRANTED. Plaintiff shall, within 21 days of entry of this Order, show cause why her claims should not be dismissed and file an amended complaint. Failure to timely show cause and file an amended complaint may result in dismissal of this case. No. additional extensions of time will be granted absent extraordinary circumstances.