Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_13-cv-01350/USCOURTS-casd-3_13-cv-01350-1/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

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TRAVIS BONDURANT,

Inmate Booking No. 13717960 Civil

No. 13cv1350 MMA (PCL)

Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING MOTION

FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO

FILE FIRST AMENDED

COMPLAINT

[Doc. No. 6]

vs.

DAVID LAMB; GARET NUGENT;

MICHAEL TAGG; CITY OF SAN

DIEGO,

Defendants.

Plaintiff, currently housed in the George Bailey Detention Facility located in San

Diego, California, and proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights Complaint pursuant to

42 U.S.C. § 1983, along with a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (“IFP”). On July

11, 2013, the Court granted Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed IFP and sua sponte dismissed

his Complaint for failing to state a claim and for seeking monetary damages against

immune defendants. (Doc. No. 4.) Plaintiff was granted leave to file an Amended

Complaint in order to correct the deficiencies of pleading identified in the Court’s Order. 

(Id. at 7-8.) The time to file an Amended Complaint has since passed but Plaintiff has

filed a Motion for Extension of Time to File a First Amended Complaint. (Doc. No. 6.) 

In this Motion, Plaintiff indicates that he has been hospitalized for several months and has

been unable to file an Amended Complaint. (Id.)

1 13cv1350 MMA (PCL)

Case 3:13-cv-01350-MMA-PCL Document 7 Filed 02/26/14 Page 1 of 3
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

Plaintiff also seeks appointment of counsel. The Constitution provides no right to

appointment of counsel in a civil case, however, unless an indigent litigant may lose his

physical liberty if he loses the litigation. Lassiter v. Dept. of Social Services, 452 U.S.

18, 25 (1981). Nonetheless, under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1), district courts are granted

discretion to appoint counsel for indigent persons. This discretion may be exercised only

under “exceptional circumstances.” Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir.

1991). “A finding of exceptional circumstances requires an evaluation of both the

‘likelihood of success on the merits and the ability of the plaintiff to articulate his claims

pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved.’ Neither of these issues is

dispositive and both must be viewed together before reaching a decision.” Id. (quoting

Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331 (9th Cir. 1986)).

The Court DENIES Plaintiff’s request for appointment of counsel without

prejudice, as neither the interests of justice nor exceptional circumstances warrant

appointment of counsel at this time. LaMere v. Risley, 827 F.2d 622, 626 (9th Cir. 1987);

Terrell, 935 F.2d at 1017.

However, the Court finds good cause to grant Plaintiff an extension of time in

which to comply with its July 11, 2013 Order. “‘Strict time limits ... ought not to be

insisted upon’ where restraints resulting from a pro se ... plaintiff’s incarceration prevent

timely compliance with court deadlines.” Eldridge v. Block, 832 F.2d 1132, 1136 (9th

Cir. 1987) (citing Tarantino v. Eggers, 380 F.2d 465, 468 (9th Cir. 1967); see also

Bennett v. King, 205 F.3d 1188, 1189 (9th Cir. 2000).

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Accordingly, the Court hereby GRANTS Plaintiff’s Motion for Extension of Time

to File a First Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 6). Plaintiff is granted sixty (60) days from

the date this Order is “Filed” in which to file a First Amended Complaint which cures all

the deficiencies of pleading noted in the Court’s July 11, 2013 Order. Plaintiff is once

again cautioned that should he elect to amend, his Amended Complaint must be complete

in itself, that it will supersede his original Complaint, and that any claim not re-alleged

2 13cv1350 MMA (PCL)

Case 3:13-cv-01350-MMA-PCL Document 7 Filed 02/26/14 Page 2 of 3
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

against any Defendant previously named will be considered waived. See S.D. CAL.

CIVLR 15.1; King v. Atiyeh, 814 F.2d 565, 567 (9th Cir. 1987). 

In addition, the Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this Order to

Plaintiff at Scripps Memorial Hospital, 9888 Genessee Avenue, Dept. 5W PCU, La

Jolla, California 92037. Plaintiff is directed to notify the Court of any future changes

of address.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: February 26, 2014

Hon. Michael M. Anello

United States District Judge

3 13cv1350 MMA (PCL)

Case 3:13-cv-01350-MMA-PCL Document 7 Filed 02/26/14 Page 3 of 3