Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_23-cv-00251/USCOURTS-caed-1_23-cv-00251-6/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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JARED KRISTOPHER RYSEDORPH,

Plaintiff,

v.

JOHN, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:23-cv-00251-ADA-BAM (PC)

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S THIRD

MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO 

FILE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

AND TO ADD SUPPLEMENTAL FACTS

(ECF No. 26)

FORTY-FIVE (45) DAY DEADLINE

Plaintiff Jared Kristopher Rysedorph (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and 

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

On July 5, 2023, the Court screened the first amended complaint and directed Plaintiff to 

file a second amended complaint or a notice of voluntary dismissal within thirty days. (ECF No. 

20.) Following two extensions of time due to Plaintiff’s broken hand, Plaintiff’s response is 

currently due on or before October 18, 2023. (ECF Nos. 23, 25.)

Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s request for a third extension of the deadline, filed 

October 12, 2023. (ECF No. 26.) Plaintiff states that he requests leave to add supplemental facts 

to the amended complaint that relate directly back to the core issue of staff at CDCR state prisons 

denying Plaintiff essential treatment for his serious medical condition (celiac disease) and the 

injuries sustained by Plaintiff due to the denial of treatment. Plaintiff requests that the Court 

grant his request to file an amended complaint which includes facts concerning events and 

Case 1:23-cv-00251-KES-BAM Document 27 Filed 10/13/23 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

information subsequent to those in the initial complaint. Plaintiff further states that due to 

conditions of his confinement, his injured hand is still not healed, and he requests a 45-day 

extension and information from the Court ADA Coordinator. (Id.)

Having considered the request, the Court finds good cause to grant the requested 

extension of time. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b). Further, Plaintiff is advised that supplemental facts may 

be included in Plaintiff’s amended complaint if they raise claims arising out of the same conduct, 

transaction, or occurrence set out in the original complaint. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15.

However, the Court finds that, in light of the number of extensions already granted for this 

deadline, Plaintiff’s prior assertion that he would have weekly access to a typewriter to 

accommodate his injured hand, and the fact that Plaintiff’s recent motions are handwritten and 

legible to the Court, further requests for extension of this deadline will be subject to a 

narrow interpretation of what constitutes good cause.

Finally, to the extent Plaintiff’s motion requests information regarding ADA 

accommodations, the Court finds that Plaintiff has demonstrated his ability to continue to

communicate with the Court through written motions and with reasonable extensions of time

during his recover from his hand injury. Plaintiff may continue to request such extensions if they 

are supported by good cause, subject to the limitation stated above.

Plaintiff is reminded that any amended complaint should be brief, Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a), but 

it must state what each named defendant did that led to the deprivation of Plaintiff’s constitutional 

rights, Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678–79 (2009). Although accepted as true, the “[f]actual 

allegations must be [sufficient] to raise a right to relief above the speculative level . . . .” Bell 

Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (citations omitted). 

Additionally, Plaintiff may not change the nature of this suit by adding new, unrelated 

claims in his first amended complaint. George v. Smith, 507 F.3d 605, 607 (7th Cir. 2007) (no 

“buckshot” complaints).

Finally, Plaintiff is advised that an amended complaint supersedes the original complaint. 

Lacey v. Maricopa Cty., 693 F.3d 896, 927 (9th Cir. 2012). Therefore, Plaintiff’s amended 

complaint must be “complete in itself without reference to the prior or superseded pleading.” 

Case 1:23-cv-00251-KES-BAM Document 27 Filed 10/13/23 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

Local Rule 220 (emphasis added). This includes any exhibits or attachments Plaintiff wishes to 

incorporate by reference.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s third motion for extension of time, (ECF No. 26), is GRANTED;

2. Within forty-five (45) days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff must file a 

second amended complaint curing the deficiencies identified by the Court’s July 5, 2023

screening order (or file a notice of voluntary dismissal); and

3. If Plaintiff fails to comply with this order, this action will be dismissed, with 

prejudice, for failure to obey a court order and for failure to state a claim.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 13, 2023 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:23-cv-00251-KES-BAM Document 27 Filed 10/13/23 Page 3 of 3