Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_22-cv-00249/USCOURTS-caed-1_22-cv-00249-8/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 560
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Civil Detainee - Conditions of Confinement
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

ALLAN FLETCHER,

Plaintiff,

v.

CLENDENIN, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:22-cv-00249-AWI-BAM (PC)

ORDER DISCHARGING ORDER TO SHOW 

CAUSE WHY ACTION SHOULD NOT BE 

DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO 

PROSECUTE

(ECF No. 27)

ORDER CLARIFYING DEADLINE FOR

DEFENDANTS TO FILE REPLY TO 

PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION

FOURTEEN (14) DAY DEADLINE 

Plaintiff Allan Fletcher (“Plaintiff”) is a civil detainee proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Individuals detained pursuant to 

the California Welfare and Institutions Code § 6600 et seq. are considered civil detainees and are 

not prisoners within the meaning of the Prison Litigation Reform Act. Page v. Torrey, 201 F.3d 

1136, 1140 (9th Cir. 2000). This action proceeds on Plaintiff’s first amended complaint against 

Defendants Clendenin and Price for failure to treat Plaintiff under the Fourteenth Amendment

Due Process Clause due to their official policy.

On November 17, 2022, Defendants filed a motion to declare Plaintiff a vexatious litigant. 

(ECF No. 25.) Following Plaintiff’s failure to file an opposition or other response by the deadline 

of December 12, 2022, Defendants filed a reply on January 6, 2023 requesting that the motion be 

Case 1:22-cv-00249-JLT-BAM Document 29 Filed 02/08/23 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

deemed unopposed and granted. (ECF No. 26.)

On January 9, 2023, in light of Plaintiff’s pro se status, the Court found it appropriate to 

grant Plaintiff a final opportunity to show cause by written response why this action should not be 

dismissed, with prejudice, for failure to prosecute. (ECF No. 27.) Plaintiff was informed that he 

could comply with the Court’s order by filing an opposition or statement of non-opposition to 

Defendants’ motion within twenty-one days of service of that order. (Id.)

On February 6, 2023, Plaintiff filed an opposition, dated February 2, 2023, to Defendants’ 

motion to declare Plaintiff a vexatious litigant. (ECF No. 28.) Accordingly, the order to show 

cause will be discharged.

The Court also finds it appropriate to clarify the deadline for the filing of Defendant’s 

supplemental reply brief, if any, in response to Plaintiff’s opposition.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

1. The January 9, 2023 order to show cause, (ECF No. 27), is DISCHARGED;

2. Defendants’ supplemental reply brief in response to Plaintiff’s opposition to the motion to 

declare Plaintiff a vexatious litigant, if any, is due within fourteen (14) days from the date 

of service of this order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 7, 2023 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:22-cv-00249-JLT-BAM Document 29 Filed 02/08/23 Page 2 of 2