Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-01808/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-01808-5/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LAKEITH LEROY MCCOY,

Plaintiff,

v.

J. RAMIREZ, et al.,

Defendants.

CASE NO. 1:13-cv-01808-MJS (PC)

ORDER DISCHARGING ORDER TO 

SHOW CAUSE 

(ECF No. 23)

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil 

rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

On January 13, 2015, the Court screened Plaintiff’s first amended complaint and 

ordered Plaintiff to either file a second amended complaint or notify the Court of his 

willingness to proceed only on his cognizable claims. (ECF No. 12.) Plaintiff requested 

and was granted two extensions of time to file an amended complaint. (ECF Nos. 18 and 

21.) He also repeatedly requested copies of his first amended complaint be sent back to 

him; they were sent to him on three separate occasions.

Nonetheless, the time for Plaintiff to amend passed without Plaintiff either filing an 

amended complaint or seeking a further extension of time to do so. Accordingly, on May 

11, 2015, the Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause within fourteen days why the action 

should not be dismissed. (ECF No. 23.) No timely response was filed.

Thereafter, Plaintiff filed several submissions addressing his failure to timely 

Case 1:13-cv-01808-DAD-JLT Document 32 Filed 06/30/15 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

respond to the order to show cause. (ECF Nos. 24, 26, 28, 29.) Plaintiff did not 

specifically address his failure to timely amend. (Id.) Nevertheless, on June 22, 2015, 

Plaintiff filed a second amended complaint. (ECF No. 31.) 

Despite Plaintiff’s failure to show cause for his untimely filing, the Court will 

discharge the order to show cause and screen Plaintiff’s second amended complaint in 

due course.

Plaintiff is advised that this Court has hundreds of such cases pending at any one 

time. Having to repeatedly respond to Plaintiff and constantly prod him to comply with his 

obligations to move the case along deprives others of the Court’s attention and will not 

continue to be tolerated. 

Nevertheless, based on the foregoing, the order to show cause (ECF No. 23) is 

HEREBY DISCHARGED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 29, 2015 /s/Michael J. Seng 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:13-cv-01808-DAD-JLT Document 32 Filed 06/30/15 Page 2 of 2