UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
October 4, 2012
CHARLES A. MILLER,
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, ET AL.,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gary S. Austin United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER GRANTING REQUEST FOR SCREENING ORDER ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE RESPONSE TO COMPLAINT (Doc 2.)
This is a civil action filed by Charles A. Miller ("Plaintiff"), a state prisoner proceeding pro se. This action was initiated by civil complaint filed by Plaintiff in the Fresno County Superior Court on June 15, 2010 (Case #10CDCG02100). On March 8, 2012, defendants Adonis, Griffith, Gutierrez, Igbinosa, Medina, and Mendez removed the case to federal court by filing a Notice of Removal of Action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b). (Doc. 1.) On March 8, 2012, Defendants filed a request for the court to screen Plaintiff's complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and grant Defendants an extension of time in which to file a responsive pleading.*fn1 Plaintiff has not opposed the requests.
The Court is required to screen complaints in civil actions in which a prisoner seeks redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). Plaintiff's complaint alleges that beginning on April 3, 2009, his right to adequate medical care under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments was violated by Defendants, employees at Pleasant Valley State Prison in Coalinga, California, and Correctional Training Facility in Soledad, California State Prison. Because Plaintiff is a prisoner and Defendants were employed at state prisons when the alleged events occurred, the court is required to screen the complaint. Therefore, Defendants' motion for the Court to screen the complaint shall be granted. In addition, good cause appearing, the motion for extension of time shall also be granted.
Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Defendants' motion for the Court to screen the complaint is GRANTED, and the court shall issue a screening order in due time;
2. Defendants are GRANTED an extension of time until thirty days from the date of service of the Court's screening order in which to file a response to the complaint.
IT IS SO ORDERED.