From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hinshaw v. Hardcastle

United States District Court, E.D. California
Jan 29, 2008
No. CIV S-07-1238 FCD GGH P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 29, 2008)

Opinion

No. CIV S-07-1238 FCD GGH P.

January 29, 2008


ORDER


Plaintiff is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se. Plaintiff alleges violations of his rights pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). On October 3, 2007, the court recommended that this action be dismissed.

On October 31, 2007, the court granted plaintiff an extension of time to file objections to the findings and recommendations. On December 17, 2007, the court granted plaintiff a second request for extension of time to file objections.

On January 10, 2008, plaintiff filed a motion for leave to file an amended complaint. This request is denied. Plaintiff has not demonstrated an ability to cure the pleading defects discussed in the October 3, 2007, findings and recommendations.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's January 10, 2008, motion to file an amended complaint is denied;

2. Plaintiff is granted twenty days from the date of this order to file objections to the October 3, 2007, findings and recommendations; no further requests for extension of time will be granted.


Summaries of

Hinshaw v. Hardcastle

United States District Court, E.D. California
Jan 29, 2008
No. CIV S-07-1238 FCD GGH P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 29, 2008)
Case details for

Hinshaw v. Hardcastle

Case Details

Full title:CHARLES ARTHUR HINSHAW, Plaintiff, v. JOHN B. HARDCASTLE, et al.…

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Jan 29, 2008

Citations

No. CIV S-07-1238 FCD GGH P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 29, 2008)