Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cv-01130/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cv-01130-1/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

ANTONIO GUTIERREZ, JR.,

Plaintiff,

v.

M. SANDOVAL,

Defendant.

Case No. 1:20-cv-01130-AWI-EPG (PC)

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF AN 

EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE SECOND 

AMENDED COMPLAINT

(ECF No. 27)

Antonio Gutierrez, Jr. (“Plaintiff), is proceeding in forma pauperis in this civil rights action 

filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

On February 4, 2021, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend and gave 

Plaintiff twenty-one days from the date of service of the order to file and serve the Second 

Amended Complaint. (ECF No. 26). That same day, Plaintiff’s counsel filed a declaration. 

(ECF No. 27).

In the declaration, Plaintiff’s counsel clarifies that while he has submitted the notice 

required by section 364 of the California Code of Civil Procedure, the 90-day period has not yet 

expired. The window expires on March 10, 2021. The reason Plaintiff’s counsel filed the motion 

to amend in advance is that the statute of limitations may run on March 12, 2021.

The Court construes Plaintiff’s counsel’s declaration as a request for an extension of time,

\\\

Case 1:20-cv-01130-KES-EPG Document 28 Filed 02/05/21 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

and the Court finds good cause to grant the request.1 

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that:

1. The Court construes Plaintiff’s declaration as a motion for an extension of time;

2. Plaintiff’s motion for an extension of time is granted; and

3. Plaintiff has until March 11, 2021, to file and serve the Second Amended 

Complaint.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 5, 2021 /s/

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1 While the Court is granting Plaintiff’s an extension of time, the Court is not taking a position on whether 

Plaintiff complied with the statute of limitations or section 364 of the California Code of Civil Procedure.

Case 1:20-cv-01130-KES-EPG Document 28 Filed 02/05/21 Page 2 of 2