UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
January 8, 2009
MATTHEW B. CRAMER, PLAINTIFF,
TARGET CORPORATION, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sandra M. Snyder United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT (DOCS. 8, 5)
ORDER DIRECTING THE CLERK TO MAKE A COPY OF PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AND SEND IT TO PLAINTIFF
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with an action for damages and other relief concerning alleged civil rights violations. The matter has been referred to the Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rules 72-302 and 72-304.
I. Motion for Extension of Time
Pending before the Court is Plaintiff's motion for a sixty-day extension of time within which to file an amended complaint pursuant to the Court's order of December 9, 2008, dismissing the complaint with leave to amend. In that order the Court explained the defects perceived in the original complaint and the pertinent law. The Plaintiff's complaint concerns a single incident involving Plaintiff's arrest by citizens working at a store from which Plaintiff had stolen merchandise, and his subsequent transport to a hospital for treatment by a police officer who independently investigated the two suspects involved; the facts are thus not complex. All that is required is for Plaintiff to state simply and directly the facts that give rise to a claim upon which relief may be granted; the Court does not need reports, formal documentation, or any other form of evidence of Plaintiff's allegations at this stage of the proceedings because it is the sufficiency of the specific facts alleged by Plaintiff, and not the weight of the evidence, with which the Court is concerned at this screening stage of the case.
With respect to the legal principles involved in fashioning an amended complaint, the Court set forth the pertinent law in the order dismissing the original complaint. Although Plaintiff claims in a conclusory fashion that the law library is understaffed, Plaintiff has not set forth specific facts constituting cause for more than a thirty-day extension of time within which to file an amended complaint.
II. Copy of the Complaint
Plaintiff requests a copy of his complaint; he alleges that he sent a spare copy of his original complaint to the Court but that it has not been returned to him. Plaintiff did not state that he sent a stamped, self-addressed envelope for mailing the copy, which is generally required before copies will be sent to parties in the mail. However, in this one instance, and in order to reduce the delay in receiving Plaintiff's statement of his claim in an amended complaint, the Court will direct the clerk to send a copy of the complaint to Plaintiff.
Plaintiff is informed that the Court will not permit repetitive delays, and no further time will be granted without a showing of specific facts constituting good cause therefor set forth in a declaration that complies with 28 U.S.C. § 1746.
Accordingly, it IS ORDERED that
1) Plaintiff's motion for an extension of time within which to file a first amended complaint IS GRANTED IN PART, and Plaintiff may file his first amended complaint in compliance with the Court's order of December 9, 2008, no later than thirty days after the date of service of this order; and
2) The Clerk of the Court IS DIRECTED to make a copy of Plaintiff's original complaint and to mail it to him with this order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.