From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mondragon v. Durham

United States District Court, D. Arizona
Jun 7, 2006
No. CIV 05-2824-PHX-MHM (LOA) (D. Ariz. Jun. 7, 2006)

Opinion

No. CIV 05-2824-PHX-MHM (LOA).

June 7, 2006


ORDER


On September 15, 2005, Plaintiff Freddy Mondragon, presently confined in the Maricopa County Towers Jail, filed a Civil Rights Complaint by a Prisoner ("Complaint") pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The Court dismissed the Complaint with leave to amend on April 4, 2006 (Doc. #3). On May 16, 2006, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Extension of Time to file an amended complaint (Doc. #5).

In his Motion, Plaintiff states that his documents have been "mishandled" by Inmate Legal Services. The Court will grant Plaintiff's Motion. Plaintiff will have forty-five (45) days from the filing date of this order to file an amended complaint.

Rule 41(b) Warning

If Plaintiff fails to timely comply with every provision of this Order, this action will be dismissed without further notice.See Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260-61 (9th Cir. 1992) (district court may dismiss action for failure to comply with any order of the court). Moreover, because the Complaint has been dismissed for failure to state a claim, if Plaintiff fails to file an amended complaint correcting the deficiencies identified in the Court's April 4, 2006 Order, the dismissal of this action will count as a "strike" under the "three strikes" provision of the Prison Litigation Reform Act. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED as follows:

(1) Plaintiff's May 16, 2006 Motion for Extension of Time (Doc. #5) is GRANTED;

(2) Plaintiff SHALL HAVE forty-five (45) days from the filing date of this Order to file an amended complaint in order to state specific allegations of deprivation of constitutional rights against proper defendant(s), to name as defendant(s) the individual(s) who participated in the activities alleged in his amended complaint, to state what injury he has suffered as a result of the activities of the defendant(s), and to show how, prior to filing this action, he exhausted his administrative remedies as to each of his claims for relief. The amended complaint must be retyped or rewritten in its entirety on the current Court-approved form included with this Order, may not incorporate any part of the original Complaint by reference, and must contain Plaintiff's original signature. If Plaintiff fails to file the amended complaint on a current Court-approved form, the amended complaint will be stricken and the action dismissed without further notice to Plaintiff. Any amended complaint submitted by Plaintiff should be clearly designated as an amended complaint on the face of the document;

(3) The Clerk of Court shall enter a judgment of dismissal of this action with prejudice and without further notice to Plaintiff if Plaintiff fails to file an amended complaint within forty-five (45) days of the date this Order is filed. Upon entry of judgment, the Clerk shall make an entry on the docket in this matter indicating that the dismissal of this action falls within the purview of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g);

(5) A clear, legible copy of every pleading or other document filed SHALL ACCOMPANY each original pleading or other document filed with the Clerk for use by the District Judge or Magistrate Judge to whom the case is assigned. See LRCiv 5.4. Failure to submit a copy along with the original pleading or document will result in the pleading or document being stricken without further notice to Plaintiff;

(6) At all times during the pendency of this action, Plaintiff SHALL IMMEDIATELY ADVISE the Court and the United States Marshal of any change of address and its effective date. Such notice shall be captioned "NOTICE OF CHANGE OF ADDRESS." The notice shall contain only information pertaining to the change of address and its effective date, except that if Plaintiff has been released from custody, the notice should so indicate. The notice shall not include any motions for any other relief. Failure to file a NOTICE OF CHANGE OF ADDRESS may result in the dismissal of the action for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b);

(7) The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to provide Plaintiff with a current, Court-approved form for filing a civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.


Summaries of

Mondragon v. Durham

United States District Court, D. Arizona
Jun 7, 2006
No. CIV 05-2824-PHX-MHM (LOA) (D. Ariz. Jun. 7, 2006)
Case details for

Mondragon v. Durham

Case Details

Full title:Freddy Mondragon, Plaintiff, v. Sgt. Durham, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, D. Arizona

Date published: Jun 7, 2006

Citations

No. CIV 05-2824-PHX-MHM (LOA) (D. Ariz. Jun. 7, 2006)