Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_10-cv-00539/USCOURTS-caed-2_10-cv-00539-6/pdf.json

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

---

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

 The docket reflects plaintiff has already filed a first amended complaint. (Dkt. No. 13.) 1

Accordingly, the court will construe plaintiff’s filing as a motion to filed a second amended

complaint and has edited the entry (dkt. no. 34) accordingly.

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RICHARD BASSETT,

Plaintiff, No. 2:10-cv-0539 KJN P

vs.

E. CALLISON, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

On June 21, 2010, plaintiff filed a motion to file a first amended complaint.

1

Plaintiff indicates he has removed all claims against defendant Staniff, who was previously

dismissed from this action, and has included other facts and corrections. Plaintiff’s second

amended complaint states a potentially cognizable claim for relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983

and 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) as to defendants Callison and Swart. Good cause appearing,

plaintiff’s motion will be granted, and defendants will be directed to respond to the second

amended complaint.

On August 4, 2010, defendants Callison and Swart filed an application for an

Case 2:10-cv-00539-KJN Document 46 Filed 08/05/10 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

additional thirty days in which to respond to the complaint. Because the court is allowing

plaintiff to amend, the court will grant defendants an additional sixty days in which to file a

response to the second amended complaint. The Clerk of the Court will be directed to serve a

copy of the second amended complaint on counsel for defendants.

On July 12, 2010, plaintiff filed a motion for court order allowing plaintiff to

communicate with a prisoner witness. However, defendants have not yet filed a responsive

pleading. Plaintiff’s motion is premature and will be denied without prejudice to its renewal

once defendants have filed a responsive pleading.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s June 21, 2010 motion to amend (dkt. no. 33) is granted; 

2. Defendants’ August 4, 2010 request for extension (dkt. no. 43) is granted;

3. Defendants Callison and Swart shall respond to the second amended complaint

(dkt. no. 34) on or before sixty days from the date of this order; and

4. The Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of the June 21, 2010 second amended

complaint (dkt. no. 34) on counsel for defendants.

5. Plaintiff’s July 12, 2010 motion (dkt. no. 39) is denied without prejudice.

DATED: August 4, 2010

_____________________________________

KENDALL J. NEWMAN

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

bass0539.mta

 

Case 2:10-cv-00539-KJN Document 46 Filed 08/05/10 Page 2 of 2