Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_20-cv-00701/USCOURTS-caed-2_20-cv-00701-2/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WILLIAM ROBERT OLMER,

Plaintiff,

v.

BUTTE COUNTY SHERIFF’S 

DEPARTMENT, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:20-cv-0701 KJN P

ORDER

Plaintiff is a former Butte County Jail inmate, now housed in state prison. On April 13, 

2020, the court received plaintiff’s motion for a six-month extension of time. Plaintiff claims that 

due to the coronavirus pandemic he is on modified program at DVI without access to the law 

library or to contact a lawyer. Plaintiff’s motion is not dated, so it is unclear whether plaintiff had 

benefit of the court’s April 9, 2020 screening order when plaintiff sought his extension. In an 

abundance of caution, the undersigned construes plaintiff’s filing as a motion for extension of 

time to file an amended complaint. 

This action is based on plaintiff’s slip and fall while housed in the Butte County Jail. The 

screening order provided plaintiff with myriad legal authorities suggesting that plaintiff may not 

be able to allege facts rising to the level of an Eighth Amendment violation, because plaintiff’s 

slip and fall on one occasion constitutes, at most, negligence. While the undersigned is 

Case 2:20-cv-00701-TLN-KJN Document 13 Filed 04/16/20 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

sympathetic to plaintiff’s situation due to the current pandemic, most prisons have paging systems 

for inmates to obtain copies of legal authorities needed to pursue their cases. Plaintiff may avail 

himself of such system to obtain copies of cases cited in the court’s screening order. That said, 

plaintiff must allege facts to support the objective and subjective elements of his Eighth 

Amendment claim, as explained in the court’s screening order. Plaintiff is not required to cite 

legal authorities in his amended pleading. 

Therefore, the court does not find good cause to grant plaintiff such a lengthy extension of 

time. Rather, plaintiff is granted sixty days in which to file an amended complaint that complies 

with the April 9, 2020 order. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s motion for an extension of time (ECF No. 12) is partially granted; and

2. Plaintiff is granted sixty days from the date of this order in which to file an amended 

complaint. Plaintiff is cautioned that failure to file an amended complaint in accordance with the 

April 9, 2020 order will result in the dismissal of this action.

Dated: April 16, 2020

/olme0701.36

Case 2:20-cv-00701-TLN-KJN Document 13 Filed 04/16/20 Page 2 of 2