Opinion
No. CIV S-10-3216 GEB GGH P.
April 26, 2011
ORDER
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis. He seeks relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
On February 25, 2011, the court dismissed the original complaint with leave to amend in 28 days. The court noted that plaintiff alleged defendants were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs, yet plaintiff failed to identify his medicals needs or how defendants violated his constitutional rights. Plaintiff's request for an extension of time to file an amended complaint was granted and the amended complaint is now due on May 22, 2011.
On April 21, 2011 plaintiff filed a motion (Doc. 18) for medical care that the court construes as a motion for a preliminary injunction. Plaintiff states that his chemotherapy treatment was stopped in the middle and when he filed an appeal, all treatments stopped. Plaintiff has not identified what he is receiving treatment for or what other treatment stopped. Plaintiff then describes how the chemotherapy has adversely effected him, but he wants the chemotherapy to continue as soon as possible.
As there is no operative complaint in this case, the court cannot determine who is the appropriate defendant or even the substance of plaintiff's claims. The court will defer ruling on the motion for a preliminary injunction until plaintiff files an amended complaint. In the amended complaint, plaintiff should include information regarding his chemotherapy claims.
In the motion for a preliminary injunction, plaintiff states Dr. Win stopped his treatments, but there is no mention of Dr. Win in the original complaint.
In accordance with the above, the court will defer ruling on the motion for a preliminary injunction until plaintiff files an amended complaint.