Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-05268/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-05268-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DONALD R. DEBOSE,

Plaintiff,

v.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA; et al., 

Defendants. /

No. C 14-5268 SI (pr)

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Donald R. DeBose filed this pro se prisoner's civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

The court reviewed the complaint and found that it had numerous deficiencies; most importantly,

the complaint failed "to provide a 'short and plain statement of the claim showing that the

pleader is entitled to relief.'" Docket # 12 at 2. The court dismissed the complaint with leave to

file an amended complaint by March 27, 2015, and cautioned that the action would be dismissed

if the amended complaint was not filed by the deadline. Id. at 5. The court dismissed this action

on April 28, 2015 because plaintiff had not filed the amended complaint that was due a month

earlier. Plaintiff then filed a motion for reconsideration, urging the court to set aside the

dismissal because he had sent in a request for extension of time on March 11, 2015 but did not

receive ruling on that request before his amended complaint was due or before the action was

dismissed. The court granted the motion for reconsideration, and vacated the dismissal. The

court ordered plaintiff to file an amended complaint curing the deficiencies identified in the

order of dismissal with leave to amend no later than June 22, 2015. The court warned plaintiff:

"No extensions of this deadline should be expected because plaintiff already had three months

to prepare his amended complaint before learning of the dismissal of the action, i.e., a diligent

plaintiff would have working on the amended complaint since receiving the February 25, 2012

Case 3:14-cv-05268-SI Document 19 Filed 06/24/15 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

order of dismissal with leave to amend until receiving the April 28, 2015 order of dismissal."

Docket # 17 at 2. 

Plaintiff has filed a motion for a 45-day extension of the deadline to file his amended

complaint because he was put in administrative segregation and was separated from his property

on an unstated date. Docket # 18 at 3. The motion was mailed on June 19, 2015. The motion

does not state when plaintiff was put in administrative segregation, how much of his amended

complaint he had completed, why he failed to file his amended complaint before being placed

in administrative segregation, or why he expects it will take until early August to be reunited

with his property. Plaintiff has had many months to prepare and file his amended complaint

since the February 25, 2015 order of dismissal with leave to amend and has not provided good

cause to once again extend the deadline for that pleading. When the court order a party to file

something, accomplishing that task has to become one of the litigant's highest priorities, but

compliance with the court's order appears not to have been much of a priority at all for this

plaintiff. A reasonably diligent plaintiff might need several days or possibly weeks (but

certainly not months) to prepare an amended complaint. The motion for another extension of

the deadline to file the amended complaint is DENIED. Docket # 18. 

Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint and the deadline by which to do so has

passed. Accordingly, this action is DISMISSED for failure to provide a short and plain

statement of the claim showing that plaintiff is entitled to relief. The clerk shall close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 24, 2015 _______________________

 SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judges

Case 3:14-cv-05268-SI Document 19 Filed 06/24/15 Page 2 of 2