Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_18-cv-01902/USCOURTS-caed-2_18-cv-01902-4/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 

RICKY L. WILLIAMS, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

MATTILLION, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:18-CV-1902-KJM-DMC-P 

ORDER 

On June 29, 2018, plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brought a civil rights 

action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as 

provided by Eastern District of California local rules. On September 6, 2019, the Magistrate 

Judge filed findings and recommendations, which were served on the parties and which contained 

notice that the parties may file objections within the time specified therein. No objections to the 

findings and recommendations were filed and on January 9, 2020, this court adopted the findings 

and recommendations in full. The Clerk of the Court was directed to enter judgment and close 

this file. Order, ECF No. 26. Plaintiff’s notice regarding amended complaint (Mot., ECF. No. 28) 

is construed as a motion for reconsideration of the court’s January 9, 2020 order dismissing the 

case without prejudice for lack of prosecution and failure to comply with court rules and orders. 

Order at 2. Plaintiff asks the court to “accept and file my amended complaint filed on 

November 28, 2019.” Mot. at 2. Plaintiff does not attach an amended complaint to his motion, 

Case 2:18-cv-01902-KJM-DMC Document 29 Filed 03/16/20 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 

nor does the docket show plaintiff filed an amended complaint on November 28, 2019, or any 

other time after October 4, 2019, when the magistrate judge granted him additional time to 

amend. Therefore, the court finds no reason to reconsider its original order and the motion is 

DENIED. 

This order resolves ECF No. 28. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: March 13, 2020. 

Case 2:18-cv-01902-KJM-DMC Document 29 Filed 03/16/20 Page 2 of 2