Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_03-cv-06364/USCOURTS-caed-1_03-cv-06364-14/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KEVIN E. FIELDS, CASE NO. CV-F-03-6364 OWW DLB P

Plaintiff, ORDER REQUIRING DEFENDANTS 

TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S

REQUEST TO FILE THIRD AMENDED

COMPLAINT

vs.

WARDEN A. K. SCRIBNER, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a civil rights action

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. section 1983. On October 5, 2005, the Court granted plaintiff’s request to extend

the deadlines in this case. In doing so, the Court extended the deadline to amend pleadings to January

13, 2006. On January 5, 2006, plaintiff filed a third amended complaint, however, he did not seek court

permission to do so. Under Rule 15(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a party may amend the

party’s pleading once as a matter of course at any time before a responsive pleading is served.

Otherwise, a party may amend only by leave of the court or by written consent of the adverse party, and

leave shall be freely given when justice so requires. Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 15(a). In this case, a responsive

pleading has been served. Therefore, plaintiff may not file an amended complaint without leave of the

court or agreement by defendants. Because the third amended complaint was not properly filed,

defendants are relieved of any obligation to respond. Within 10 days of this order, defendants are

Case 1:03-cv-06364-LJO -DLB Document 99 Filed 02/09/06 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

HEREBY ORDERED to advise the Court of their position on plaintiff’s proposed third amended

complaint. The Court will thereafter rule on plaintiff’s presumed request to file a third amended

complaint. 

 June 14, 2005 and August 30, 2005, plaintiff filed motions to compel discovery from defendants.

Defendants have not responded to these motions.

Accordingly, defendants are HEREBY ORDERED to respond to plaintiff’s motions to compel

filed on June 14, 2005 and August 30, 2005 within 20 days of this order. Defendants’ failure to respond

as ordered will be taken as non-opposition to the motions.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: February 9, 2006 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

3c0hj8 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:03-cv-06364-LJO -DLB Document 99 Filed 02/09/06 Page 2 of 2