Opinion
Case No.: 1:16-cv-01817-AWI-BAM (PC)
04-15-2018
RICKY RIVERA, Plaintiff, v. DAVE DAVEY, et al., Defendants.
ORDER VACATING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
(ECF No. 19) ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT WITHIN THIRTY DAYS
(ECF No. 20)
Plaintiff Ricky Rivera is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
I. Background
On November 22, 2017, the undersigned screened Plaintiff's complaint, found that he had failed to state any cognizable claim, and granted him leave to amend within thirty (30) days. (ECF No. 14.) Plaintiff failed to amend, and on January 11, 2018, the Court issued findings and recommendations recommending dismissal of this action. (ECF No. 15.) Plaintiff filed a motion seeking an extension of time to amend his complaint, (ECF No. 16), and therefore on January 16, 2018, the Court vacated the findings and recommendations and granted Plaintiff an additional thirty days to file an amended complaint, (ECF No. 16.)
Rather than file an amended complaint, on February 9, 2018, Plaintiff filed objections arguing that he had sufficiently pleaded a cognizable claim in his original complaint. (ECF No. 18.) On March 22, 2018, the Court issued findings and recommendations that it had considered Plaintiff's objections, but nevertheless found that his complaint failed to state a cognizable claim for relief. (ECF No. 19.) Thus, the Court recommended dismissal of this action, and allowed fourteen (14) days for objections. (Id.)
II. Request for Extension of Time
Currently before the Court is Plaintiff's motion to extend the deadline for objections to the findings and recommendations, with a declaration in support, filed on April 9, 2018. (ECF No. 20.) Plaintiff asserts in the motion that as a layman at the law with a limited education, he misunderstood the Court's prior screening order and findings and recommendations. Plaintiff has since found a fellow inmate to assist him with his action, and now seeks leave to file a first amended complaint curing the deficiencies previously identified by the Court, as opposed to standing on his original complaint. Plaintiff asserts that he previously failed to amend based on his pro se status and misunderstanding, but is diligently working on amended allegations. Therefore, he seeks a thirty (30) day extension of time to now file an amended complaint in compliance with the Court's November 22, 2017 screening order.
The Court finds that the interests of justice are best served by allowing Plaintiff an opportunity to amend his complaint, and that he has shown diligence and good cause under the circumstances. Therefore, one final extension of time will be granted. Because Plaintiff has now been granted multiple extensions of time to file an amended complaint, no further extensions of time will be granted absent extraordinary cause.
III. Conclusion
Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The findings and recommendations issued on March 22, 2018 (ECF No. 15), are vacated;
2. Within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint;
3. No extension of time of the deadline set in this order shall be granted. IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: April 15 , 2018
/s/ Barbara A . McAuliffe
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE