Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01439/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01439-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SCHA BUCK LARSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

S. SMITH,

Defendant.

Case No. 1:15-cv-01439-BAM-PC

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK’S OFFICE TO 

UPDATE PLAINTIFF’S ADDRESS OF 

RECORD 

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF A 

THIRTY DAY EXTENSION OF TIME TO 

EITHER FILE AN AMENDED 

COMPLAINT OR NOTIFY THE COURT OF 

HIS INTENTION TO PROCEED ON 

COGNIZABLE CLAIMS

THIRTY DAY DEADLINE

Plaintiff Scha Buck Larson is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights 

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

On March 11, 2016, an order was entered, requiring Plaintiff to either file an amended 

complaint or notify the Court of his intention to proceed only on the claims found to be 

cognizable. (ECF No. 12.) On March 31, 2016, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Change of Address, 

indicating that he was in custody at the San Diego County Central Jail. (ECF No. 13.) On April 

14, 2016, Plaintiff filed a response to the screening order. Plaintiff indicated that he had been 

taken into local custody, but would be released soon. The April 14, 2016, order indicated an 

address of the George F. Bailey Detention Center in San Diego County. (ECF No. 13.) On April 

19, 2016, the Court granted Plaintiff a thirty day extension of time in which to comply with the 

Case 1:15-cv-01439-BAM Document 16 Filed 06/01/16 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

March 11, 2016, screening order. Plaintiff has not complied with the screening order, or filed 

any response to the April 19, 2016, order.

A review of the docket indicates that the April 19, 2016, order was served on Plaintiff at 

an address other than the address noted on his March 31, 2016, change of address or the address 

noted by Plaintiff in his April 14, 2016, response. Because the order granting Plaintiff’s 

extension of time was not served on Plaintiff at his most recently indicated address, the Court 

will grant Plaintiff a further extension of time to comply with the March 11, 2016, order.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Clerk is directed to update the docket to reflect Plaintiff’s address noted 

in his April 14, 2016, response. (ECF No. 14.)

2. The Clerk shall serve this order on Plaintiff at the San Diego County Jail at 

the address of record indicated in the April 14, 2016, response (ECF No. 14), 

and the March 31, 2016, Notice of Change of Address. (ECF No. 12.)

3. Plaintiff is granted an extension of time of thirty days from the date of service 

of this order in which to file a response to the March 11, 2016, order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 31, 2016 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-01439-BAM Document 16 Filed 06/01/16 Page 2 of 2