IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
June 28, 2009
BARRY LOUIS LAMON, PLAINTIFF,
DERRAL ADAMS, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sandra M. Snyder United States Magistrate Judge
On May 7, 2009, an order was entered, finding that the Second Amended Complaint stated a claim as to certain defendants. The order also noted that the Second Amended Complaint failed to state a claim as to the remaining defendants. Plaintiff was granted an opportunity to either proceed on the Second Amended Complaint or file a Third Amended Complaint. Plaintiff was advised that if he desired to correct the deficiencies identified in the Second Amended Complaint, he should file a Third Amended Complaint.
In response, Plaintiff filed a document titled as objections. Plaintiff indicates that he would like to proceed against the defendants that he stated a claim against. Plaintiff also lodges objections to that portion of the order that identifies the deficiencies in the Second Amended Complaint.
Plaintiff is advised that he has only two options. If Plaintiff desires to correct the deficiencies identified in the May 7, 2009, order, he has leave to file a Third Amended Complaint. Should Plaintiff desire to proceed on the Second Amended Complaint, the court will recommend dismissal of the claims and defendants identified in the May 7, 2009, order. The court therefore construes Plaintiff's objections as a request for an extension of time in which to file a Third Amended Complaint. Should Plaintiff fail to do so, this action will proceed on the Second Amended Complaint in accordance with the order of May 7, 2009.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff is granted thirty days from the date of service of this order in which to file a Third Amended Complaint.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.