Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_24-cv-00337/USCOURTS-caed-1_24-cv-00337-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JENNIFER DOE and NANCY DOE,

Plaintiffs,

v.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:24-cv-00337-KES-CDB

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ 

REQUESTED EXTENSION OF TIME TO 

RESPOND TO THE COMPLAINT AS 

MODIFIED

(Doc. 1)

ORDER VACATING SCHEDULING 

CONFERENCE

Background

Plaintiffs Jennifer Doe and Nancy Doe, state inmates proceeding through counsel,

initiated this action with the filing of a complaint in the California Superior Court for the County 

of Madera, alleging, among other things, violations of their rights by Defendants State of 

California and the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”) under the 

Fifth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution. (Doc. 1 p. 1).

Defendants removed the action to this Court on March 21, 2024. (Doc. 1). In their notice 

of removal, Defendants request the Court screen Plaintiffs’ complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 

1915A and grant Defendants 30 days to respond to the complaint from the date of service of the 

Court’s order screening the complaint. Id. at 3.

Defendants’ request for an extension of time to respond to the complaint after service of 

the Court’s screening order will be granted. The Court shall proceed with screening Plaintiff’s 

complaint and acknowledges that the screening process is expected to be time consuming given 

Case 1:24-cv-00337-JLT-CDB Document 3 Filed 03/28/24 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

that the complaint spans over 45 pages and raises 21 counts against multiple defendants.

Conclusion and Order

For the foregoing reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

1. Defendant shall have 21 days to respond to the complaint from the date of service of the 

Court’s order screening the complaint. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1)(A)(i).

2. To allow for screening of the complaint and filing of a responsive pleading, the 

scheduling conference set for June 17, 2024 (Doc. 2) is HEREBY VACATED to be reset once 

the pleadings have settled.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 27, 2024 ___________________ _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:24-cv-00337-JLT-CDB Document 3 Filed 03/28/24 Page 2 of 2