Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-02727/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-02727-4/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MYRON ATRICE PAYNE, No. CIV S-09-2727-LKK-CMK-P

Plaintiff, 

vs. ORDER

G. BRACKETT, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42

U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the court is plaintiff’s motion (Doc. 22) filed on July 2, 2010. 

Plaintiff seeks a further 60-day extension of time to file an amended complaint. Plaintiff states

that “if the court decides to deny plaintiff’s request for enlargement/extension of time, plaintiff

requests the court to allow plaintiff to ‘withdraw’ his complaint without prejudice, so that

plaintiff can re-file a properly pleaded complaint at a later date.” 

As to plaintiff’s request for enlargement of time, the court does not find good

cause exists for a further extension of time. This action was initially filed in September 2009 and

transferred to this court in October 2009. After the court granted in forma pauperis status on

October 5, 2009, but before the court issued a screening order, plaintiff requested leave to file an

Case 2:09-cv-02727-LKK -CMK Document 23 Filed 07/23/10 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

2

amended complaint (see Doc. 15). The court issued an order denying that request as unnecessary

because plaintiff could (and still can) amend his pleading as a matter of right without leave of

court. On May 7, 2010, plaintiff was directed to file an amended complaint within 30 days. That

deadline was subsequently extended to July 7, 2010. In his current request for an additional 60

days, plaintiff states that he has limited law library access. Given, however, that plaintiff need

only plead factual allegations and need not include any legal research or argument with his

complaint, an extension of time to provide plaintiff time to gain access to the prison law library is

not warranted or necessary. Therefore, given the length of time this case has already been

pending, as well as the lack of good cause shown for an additional extension of time, the court

declines to grant plaintiff’s request. 

Anticipating this possibility, plaintiff’s motion seeks in the alternative leave to

voluntarily dismiss this action without prejudice. Because no response to the complaint has been

filed, leave of court is not required and the action is dismissed without prejudice on plaintiff’s

notice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(I). The Clerk of the Court is directed to terminate all

pending motions and close this file. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: July 22, 2010

______________________________________

CRAIG M. KELLISON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:09-cv-02727-LKK -CMK Document 23 Filed 07/23/10 Page 2 of 2