Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-00307/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-00307-11/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

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SHELDON RAY NEWSOME,

Plaintiff,

v.

M. LOTERZSTAIN, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 2:19-cv-00307-JAM-JDP (PC)

ORDER FOR DEFENDANTS TO SHOW

CAUSE WHY NO RESPONSIVE PLEADING 

HAS BEEN FILED

After service of the summons and operative complaint, defendants were granted two 

extensions to file responsive pleadings. ECF Nos. 29, 32. In lieu of answering the complaint, 

defendants filed a motion to dismiss on June 25, 2020. ECF No. 30; see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 

12(a)(4) (extending the time to file and serve a responsive pleading when a motion to dismiss is 

pending). On September 9, 2020, defendants’ motion to dismiss was resolved by an order 

adopting finding and recommendations to deny defendants’ motion to dismiss. ECF No. 41. 

Defendants had 14 days from the date of that order to file a responsive pleading but have failed to 

do so. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(4)(A). Thus, defendants are ordered to show cause why no 

responsive pleading has been filed.

Dated: October 25, 2020

Case 2:19-cv-00307-DAD-JDP Document 44 Filed 10/26/20 Page 1 of 1