Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-00999/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-00999-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act

---

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

ALBERT ORTEGA,

Plaintiff,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:19-cv-00999-NONE-BAM (PC)

ORDER VACATING ORDER TO SHOW 

CAUSE ISSUED FEBRUARY 15, 2020

(ECF No. 16)

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION 

FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE FIRST 

AMENDED COMPLAINT

(ECF No. 17)

THIRTY (30) DAY DEADLINE

Plaintiff Albert Ortega is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in 

this civil rights action pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2401 et 

seq. 

On December 4, 2019, the Court issued a screening order finding that Plaintiff had failed 

to state any cognizable claim for relief in his complaint, and directing Plaintiff to file either a first 

amended complaint or a notice of voluntary dismissal, within thirty days from the date that the 

order was served. (ECF No. 12.) 

On December 30, 2019, Plaintiff filed a motion for a 30-day extension of time to file a 

first amended complaint. (ECF No. 13.)

On January 2, 2020, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion for an extension of time and 

Case 1:19-cv-00999-JLT-EPG Document 18 Filed 03/09/20 Page 1 of 3
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

ordered Plaintiff to file either a first amended complaint or a notice of voluntary dismissal within 

thirty days from the date of service of the order. (ECF No. 14.) 

Plaintiff failed to file a first amended complaint, notify the Court in writing of his 

willingness to proceed only on the claims found cognizable by the Court, or otherwise 

communicate with the Court within the allotted time. Therefore, on February 15, 2020, the Court 

ordered Plaintiff to show cause in writing why this action should not be dismissed for Plaintiff’s 

failure to comply with the Court’s December 4, 2019 screening order, failure to prosecute, and 

failure to state a claim for relief, within fourteen (14) days from the date of service of the order. 

(ECF No. 16.)

On March 5, 2020, Plaintiff filed a written response to the Court’s order to show cause. 

(ECF No. 17.) In his response, Plaintiff contends that this action should not be dismissed because 

he was on modified lockdown from December 12, 2019 to February 25, 2020 and, during that 

time, he did not have access to his legal paperwork, he was unable to gain access to the supplies 

needed for legal work (paper, pencils, etc.), and he found it almost impossible to access any legal 

materials via the law library. (Id.). Therefore, Plaintiff requests that the Court grant him a thirtyday extension of time to file a first amended complaint. (Id.)

Having considered the request, the Court finds that Plaintiff has demonstrated good cause 

for an extension of time. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b). Therefore, Plaintiff’s motion for a 30-day 

extension of time to file a first amended complaint is granted. In light of the extension of time to 

file a first amended complaint, the order to show cause issued on February 15, 2020 is vacated.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The order to show cause issued on February 15, 2020, (ECF No. 16), is 

VACATED;

2. Plaintiff’s motion for a 30-day extension of time to file a first amended complaint, 

(ECF No. 17), is GRANTED; 

3. Within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall file

either a first amended complaint curing the deficiencies identified by the Court in 

its December 4, 2019 order, or a notice of voluntary dismissal; and

Case 1:19-cv-00999-JLT-EPG Document 18 Filed 03/09/20 Page 2 of 3
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

3

4. Plaintiff is warned that failure to comply with this order will result in a 

recommendation to the District Judge that this action be dismissed for failure to 

obey a court order, failure to prosecute, and failure to state a cognizable claim for 

relief.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 9, 2020 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:19-cv-00999-JLT-EPG Document 18 Filed 03/09/20 Page 3 of 3