Opinion
C23-00238RSM
06-20-2023
DONITA Y. LANDRO, Plaintiff, v. C2G LIMITED COMPANY, et al., Defendants.
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE
RICARDO S. MARTINEZ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff Donita Y. Landro's “Amended Motion and Complaint for Continuance of Trial.” Dkt. #26.
On April 20, 2023, the Court issued an Order granting Defendants' Motions to Dismiss. Dkt. #26. Plaintiff's claims were dismissed with leave to amend. The Court gave Plaintiff 30 days to file an amended complaint and warned that if Plaintiff failed to do so, “this case will be closed.” Id. at 6. The instant Motion was received on May 23 and filed effective May 18, 2023. See Docket. Plaintiff has filed nothing else and the deadline to amend has passed.
Plaintiff's “Amended Motion and Complaint for Continuance of Trial” is a Motion, not an amended complaint. Plaintiff has not presented amended claims in the format of a pleading. It is clear from this filing that Plaintiff understood the Court's Order and the 30-day deadline. See Dkt. #26 at 2. Instead of amending, Plaintiff requests a “continuance for trial or hearing.” Id. at 1. Plaintiff repeats the substance of her now-dismissed claims. Plaintiff adds to her claims in certain disturbing ways, indicating that there were “hidden speakers” at her workplace and “some type of military-style pestilence rifle shooting particles into Plaintiff's skin.” Id. at 2. Plaintiff accuses defense counsel of spying on her at the library based on the fact that they were able to “read and provide a response only 4 days after Plaintiff submitted her Opposition of Motion to Dismiss.” Id. at 7. Plaintiff accuses Defendants of obstruction of justice. The Motion goes on like this for more than 20 pages. At no point does Plaintiff provide good cause to extend the Court-imposed deadline to file an amended complaint. She does not argue for reconsideration of the Court's Order dismissing her claims.
The Court finds no basis to extend the 30-day deadline to amend. It is unclear what other relief is being requested; there are no other deadlines in this case to continue. The claims have been dismissed and this case should now be closed.
Having reviewed Plaintiff's Motion and all attachments, and the remainder of the record, the Court hereby finds and ORDERS that Plaintiff Donita Y. Landro's “Amended Motion and Complaint for Continuance of Trial,” Dkt. #26, is DENIED. This case is now CLOSED.