Opinion
1:21-cv-00704-NE-SAB (PC)
12-08-2021
URIE NORRIS, Plaintiff, v. DONNY YOUNGBLOOD, et al., Defendants.
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO TRANSFER CASE TO THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, GRANTING A THIRTY DAY EXTENSION OF TIME, AND DIRECTING THE CLERK OF COURT TO SEND A COURTESY COPY OF THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT (DOC. NO. 26)
Plaintiff Urie Norris is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
On October 14, 2021, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations recommending that this action be dismissed due to plaintiff's failure to state a cognizable claim for relief. (Doc. No. 22.) Plaintiff filed objections to those findings and recommendations on October 25, 2021. (Doc. No. 23.) Therein, plaintiff indicated that he had been in consultation with a lawyer about the possibility of securing the assistance of counsel to prosecute this case. Therefore, on November 2, 2021, the court held the findings and recommendations in abeyance and allowed plaintiff thirty days to continue those discussions and/or permit a further filing by counsel. (Doc. No. 25.) On November 29, 2021, plaintiff filed a motion requesting both a ninety-day extension of time to respond to the court's November 2, 2021 order, and that the action be transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California due to the ongoing judicial resource emergency in this district. (Doc. No. 26.) Finally, plaintiff also requested a copy of his original and first amended complaint. (Id.)
As an initial matter, there is no basis to transfer this action to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Venue lies in this court and there is no indication that this particular ase will be materially delayed.
In addition, plaintiff has failed to provide a sufficient basis to justify a ninety-day extension of ime. Plaintiff contends that his “correspondence” is in the United States Postal Service and due to elays in the mail system he will need ninety days to communicate with potential counsel. Although laintiff does not identify the counsel with whom he is attempting to communicate or indicate what correspondence” was sent, in the interest of justice, the court will grant plaintiff thirty additional days o file an amended complaint No further extensions of time will be granted for this purpose.
Plaintiff has also requested a copy of his original and first amended complaints. Plaintiff is dvised that the court does not ordinarily provide free copies of case documents to parties. However, he court will make a one-time exception in this matter and provide plaintiff with a courtesy copy of he operative first amended complaint.
Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff s motion to transfer this action to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California is denied;
2. Plaintiff is granted thirty (30) days to respond to the court's November 2, 2021 order; and
3. The Clerk of the Court shall send plaintiff a courtesy copy of his first amended complaint (Doc. No. 19).
IT IS SO ORDERED.