Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01105/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01105-3/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LAWRENCE BIRKS,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-05-1105 LKK PAN P

vs.

C. A. TERHUNE, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

On December 8, 2005, plaintiff filed a document styled “Objection to Magistrate

Judge Recommendation and Finding to Dismiss Plaintiff Civil Complaint In Its Entirety.” The

court construes this document as a request for reconsideration of the magistrate judge’s order

filed November 18, 2005, dismissing plaintiff’s complaint with leave to amend. On December

27, 2005, the magistrate judge issued an order directing plaintiff to file an amended complaint

within ten days or risk dismissal of this action. On January 5, 2006, plaintiff filed objections to

that order, which the court also construes as a request for reconsideration thereof.

Pursuant to E.D. Local Rule 72-303(f), a magistrate judge’s orders shall be upheld

unless “clearly erroneous or contrary to law.” Upon review of the entire file, the court finds that

it does not appear that the magistrate judge’s rulings were clearly erroneous or contrary to law. 

/////

Case 2:05-cv-01105-LKK -EFB Document 25 Filed 03/31/06 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

2

The court will, however, grant plaintiff one additional period of twenty days in which to file an

amended complaint.

 In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s December 8, 2005 objections are construed as a request for

reconsideration of the magistrate judge’s November 18, 2005 order dismissing plaintiff’s

complaint with leave to amend;

2. Plaintiff’s January 5, 2006 objections are construed as a request for

reconsideration of the magistrate judge’s December 27, 2005 order; 

3. Upon reconsideration, the order of the magistrate judge filed November 18,

2005 is affirmed; and

4. Plaintiff is granted one final period of thirty days in which to file an amended

complaint.

DATED: March 30, 2006.

/s/Lawrence K. Karlton 

LAWRENCE K. KARLTON

SENIOR JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

/birk1105.850

Case 2:05-cv-01105-LKK -EFB Document 25 Filed 03/31/06 Page 2 of 2