Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00130/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00130-2/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

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL SIMONS,

 Plaintiff,

 vs.

J. SUNDARAM, et al.,

 Defendants.

1:15-cv-00130-GSA-PC

ORDER REQUESTING CLARIFICATION 

FROM PLAINTIFF

THIRTY DAY DEADLINE TO RESPOND

This order is being issued for Plaintiff to clarify whether (1) he intends to proceed only 

against defendants Sundaram and Ugueze on the medical claims found cognizable by the Court 

in the original Complaint filed on January 26, 2015 (ECF No. 1); or (2) he intends to proceed 

with the First Amended Complaint filed on December 21, 2015 (ECF No. 11). Plaintiff shall 

have thirty days to respond. 

I. BACKGROUND

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

with this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On November 25, 2015, the Court 

found that Plaintiff stated cognizable claims in the original Complaint, filed on January 1, 

2015, against defendants Sundaram and Ugueze, on Plaintiff’s medical claims under the Eighth 

Amendment. (ECF No. 10.) Plaintiff was granted thirty days in which to either: (1) file a First 

Amended Complaint; or (2) notify the Court that he is willing to proceed only with the claims 

found cognizable by the Court. (Id.)

On December 31, 2015, Plaintiff filed both a First Amended Complaint and a notice 

that he is willing to proceed only with the cognizable claims. (ECF Nos. 11, 12.)

Case 1:15-cv-00130-GSA Document 14 Filed 10/21/16 Page 1 of 2
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

The Court’s December 21, 2015 order gave Plaintiff a choice, and Plaintiff was required

to make one choice or the other. Plaintiff has made both choices and therefore the Court does 

not know how Plaintiff wishes to proceed in this action. Therefore, the Court now requests 

clarification from Plaintiff of his intentions within thirty days. 

If Plaintiff wishes to proceed with the original Complaint, the Court shall initiate 

service of process upon defendants Sundaram and Ugueze by sending Plaintiff service 

documents to complete and return to the Court. If Plaintiff wishes to proceed with the First 

Amended Complaint, the Court shall screen the First Amended Complaint in due course.

III. CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Within thirty days of the date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall respond in 

writing to this order, clarifying whether: 

(a) He wishes to proceed only against defendants Sundaram and Ugueze on 

the medical claims found cognizable by the Court in the original 

Complaint filed on January 26, 2015; 

OR

(b) He wishes to proceed with the First Amended Complaint filed on 

December 21, 2015;

Plaintiff must make only one choice; and

2. If Plaintiff fails to comply with order, this case may be dismissed, without 

prejudice, for failure to comply with a court order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 21, 2016 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-00130-GSA Document 14 Filed 10/21/16 Page 2 of 2