Opinion
1:21-cv-01036-DAD-EPG (PC)
06-28-2022
LEOBARDO ERIC RAMOS, Plaintiff, v. MAYFIELD, et al., Defendants.
ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SCHEDULING DISCOVERY
(ECF NO. 49)
Leobardo Ramos (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
On June 27, 2022, Plaintiff filed a “motion for scheduling discovery.” (ECF No. 49). Plaintiff states that he is moving this case forward so the Court can “establish discovery” after he files his Second Amended Complaint. Plaintiff also states that a thirty-day time frame was ordered by the Court, but he lacked all essentials because the law library was closed. Plaintiff asks for an extension of time, and states that he is ready to present his Second Amended Complaint and “file for discovery.”
It is not clear what Plaintiff is asking for. On April 8, 2022, the Court did set a thirty-day deadline for the parties to file scheduling and discovery statements. (ECF No. 43). However, the Court already extended this thirty-day deadline, giving Plaintiff until June 10, 2022, to file his statement. (ECF No. 45). To the extent Plaintiff is asking for another extension of this deadline, 1 the Court will grant Plaintiff's motion.
As to Plaintiff's statements regarding a Second Amended Complaint, the Court previously informed Plaintiff that he does not have a deadline to file a Second Amended Complaint, and that he must file a motion for leave to amend if he wants to amend his complaint. (ECF No. 27, p. 1; ECF No. 16, p. 1 n.1).
Accordingly, based on the foregoing, IT IS ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff has twenty-one days from the date of service of this order to file his scheduling and discovery statement;
2. Failure to comply with this order may result in the dismissal of this action; and
3. The Clerk of Court is directed to send Plaintiff a copy of the order requiring statements from parties regarding schedule and discovery (ECF No. 43).
IT IS SO ORDERED.