Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-01466/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-01466-4/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

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANTHONY LAWS,

Plaintiff,

v.

R. OBERT et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:14-cv-1466 DAD P 

ORDER

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis. Plaintiff seeks relief 

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the court is plaintiff’s motion to amend and 

plaintiff’s proposed fourth amended complaint.

On May 26, 2015, this court ordered service of plaintiff’s third amended complaint on 

defendants. On July 1, 2015, plaintiff filed the pending motion to amend his complaint to add 

two Doe defendants, namely, a John Doe (Records Department Personnel) and John Doe 

(Records Department Supervisor) to his complaint. Plaintiff does not seek leave to add any new 

causes of actions against any of the named the defendants. He only wishes to assert his existing 

access to courts claim against the Doe defendants.

The court will deny plaintiff’s motion to amend without prejudice. Plaintiff is advised 

that this court cannot order service of plaintiff’s complaint on any defendant not actually 

identified by name in his complaint. When plaintiff discovers the identity of his John Doe 

Case 2:14-cv-01466-JAM-DB Document 37 Filed 10/08/15 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

defendants, he may file a new motion to amend, together with a proposed amended complaint.

Also pending before the court is defendant Obert’s motion for an extension of time to file 

a response to plaintiff’s third amended complaint. Good cause appearing, the court will grant 

defendant’s request. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s motion to amend (Doc. No. 35) is denied without prejudice;

2. Defendants’ motion for an extension of time to file a responsive pleading (Doc. No. 

36) is granted; and

3. Within thirty days from the date of this order, defendant shall file a response to 

plaintiff’s third amended complaint.

Dated: October 8, 2015

DAD:9

laws1466.mta

Case 2:14-cv-01466-JAM-DB Document 37 Filed 10/08/15 Page 2 of 2