Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05491/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05491-2/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

MICHAEL GONZALES,

Plaintiff,

v.

GADSEN, BEEBE, et. al.,

Defendants.

 /

CV F 04 5491 OWW LJO P 

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST

FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE

AMENDED COMPLAINT (Doc. 21.) 

 Michael Gonzales (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

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

Plaintiff filed the instant action on March 26, 2004. On April 29, 2005, Plaintiff filed a

Second Amended Complaint. The Court dismissed the Complaint with leave to amend on July

23, 2005. 

On July 13, 2005, Plaintiff moved for an additional thirty days to file an Second

Amended Complaint. Plaintiff states that he needs the time because he is untrained in the law

and has limited law library access to do research on how to draft a complaint. 

This Court’s Order dismissing with leave to amend informed Plaintiff of the deficiencies

of the Complaint, namely that Plaintiff did not list his claims for relief but merely provided the

Court with a transcript. In addition, the document was so lengthy that it violated Rule 8's

requirements for a short and plain statement. The Court also directed the Clerk of Court to send

Plaintiff a blank civil rights form. This form was created specifically for pro per prisoners who

Case 1:04-cv-05491-OWW -LJO Document 22 Filed 07/14/05 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

are untrained in the law. Plaintiff only need follow the directions on the form. The form requires

Plaintiff to state his claim for relief and provide a short statement of the facts that support his

claim. Plaintiff should keep the “short and plaint” requirement in mind for the Court will not

wade through numerous exhibits or pages of transcripts to try to figure out what claim the

Plaintiff might be trying to raise. The responsibility to come forward with a clear allegation of a

violation of constitutional rights with a brief statement of facts lies with the Plaintiff and not this

Court. Should Plaintiff again fail to heed the short and plain requirement of Rule 8, his

complaint will again be dismissed. Plaintiff should note further that because he is proceeding in

pro per, no legal research is required. Again, Plaintiff need only state the claim for relief and

provide a brief statement of facts that support his claim. No research or access to the law library

is necessary. 

The Court HEREBY ORDERS: 

1. The Request for an Extension of Time is GRANTED. The Second Amended

Complaint is due within THIRTY (30) days of the date of service of this Order. 

Plaintiff is reminded that his failure to comply with this or any Order of the Court will

result in a Recommendation that the action be dismissed. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 14, 2005 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

b9ed48 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-05491-OWW -LJO Document 22 Filed 07/14/05 Page 2 of 2