Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_03-cv-05814/USCOURTS-caed-1_03-cv-05814-0/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

JOHNNY GRAY, JR.,

Plaintiff,

v.

GOVERNOR GRAY DAVIS, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. CV-F-03-5814 AWI SMS P

ORDER STRIKING PLAINTIFF’S SECOND

AND THIRD RESPONSES TO ORDER TO

SHOW CAUSE, AND DISCHARGING ORDER

TO SHOW CAUSE

(Docs. 42, 47, and 50)

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

DENYING IN PART MOTION TO AMEND,

AND REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO FILE A

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT IN

COMPLIANCE WITH THE COURT’S

ORDERS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 2004 AND

NOVEMBER 22, 2004 WITHIN THIRTY

DAYS

(Doc. 55)

I. Order to Show Cause

Plaintiff Johnny Gray (“plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis

in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On January 11, 2005, the undersigned issued

an order requiring plaintiff to show cause why this action should not be dismissed for failure to file

a second amended complaint in compliance with Judge Ishii’s order of September 30, 2004. (Doc.

42.) On January 25, 2005, plaintiff filed a response to the order to show cause. (Doc. 45.) On

February 8, 2005 and February 22, 2005, plaintiff filed additional responses to the order to show

cause. (Docs. 47, 50.)

///

Case 1:03-cv-05814-AWI -SMS Document 56 Filed 04/25/05 Page 1 of 3
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

Based on plaintiff’s first response, the order to show cause will be discharged and this action

will not be dismissed at this juncture. Plaintiff’s second and third responses will be stricken from

the record. Plaintiff may only file one response to the court’s order to show cause. Once a response

to an order is filed, no further responses are permitted absent leave of court. In this instance, plaintiff

did not seek and was not granted leave to file any further responses and the court will not consider

his second and third responses to the order to show cause. 

II. Motion to Amend

On April 19, 2005, plaintiff filed a motion seeking leave to amend. Plaintiff’s motion is

granted in part and denied in part as follows. Plaintiff is granted thirty days from the date of service

of this order within which to file a second amended complaint that complies with the court’s orders

of September 30, 2004 and November 22, 2004.

To the extent that plaintiff is seeking leave to amend to add new claims, plaintiff’s motion

is denied. Plaintiff appears to be seeking leave to amend to add claims based on his exposure to

asbestos during his service in the military. Plaintiff also raises the issues of interference with his

mail to the Department of Veterans Affairs, of safety stemming from an encounter with a Mexican

Mafia member, of a beating, and of the placement of spiders in plaintiff’s cell. None of these issues

are related to the claims in plaintiff’s first amended complaint. This action involves the claim that

plaintiff was repeatedly assaulted sexually by his forty-four year old cellmate during March and

April of 2002 while housed at North Kern State Prison in Delano. Plaintiff was previously notified

by this court that he may not add any new claims that are unrelated to the claims set forth in his

amended complaint. Therefore, plaintiff may not amend to add the claims described in this

paragraph.

 Plaintiff has thirty days to file a second amended complaint curing the deficiencies in

his sexual abuse claim identified by the court in the Findings and Recommendations filed on

August 13, 2004. Plaintiff may not add any new, unrelated claims in his second amended

complaint. Plaintiff is expressly warned that the inclusion of any new, unrelated claims in his

second amended complaint will result in the issuance of an order striking the second amended

complaint from the record and dismissing this action, with prejudice. 

Case 1:03-cv-05814-AWI -SMS Document 56 Filed 04/25/05 Page 2 of 3
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

3

III. Order

As set forth in the preceding sections, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s second and third responses to the order to show cause, filed on February

8, 2005, and on February 22, 2005, are STRICKEN from the record (docs 47, 50);

2. The order to show cause, filed on January 11, 2005, is DISCHARGED;

3. Plaintiff’s motion seeking leave to amend, filed on April 19, 2005, is GRANTED IN

PART and DENIED IN PART as follows:

a. Within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order, plaintiff shall

file a second amended complaint curing the deficiencies identified in the

Findings and Recommendations filed on August 13, 2004;

b. Plaintiff may not add any new claims unrelated to the sexual abuse claim set

forth in his first amended complaint; and

c. If plaintiff adds any new claims unrelated to the sexual abuse claim set forth

in his first amended complaint, the second amended complaint will be

stricken from the record and this action will be dismissed, with prejudice; and

4. The Clerk’s Office shall send plaintiff a section 1983 complaint form.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 25, 2005 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:03-cv-05814-AWI -SMS Document 56 Filed 04/25/05 Page 3 of 3