Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_10-cv-00235/USCOURTS-azd-2_10-cv-00235-1/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

JDDL-K

WO KM

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

James Earl Phillips, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

City of Phoenix Police Department, et al.,

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 10-235-PHX-MHM (JRI)

ORDER

Plaintiff James Earl Phillips, who is confined in the Arizona State Prison ComplexDouglas, filed “Motion for Leave to File Delayed Civil Rights Complaint” and lodged a pro

se civil rights Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and an Application to Proceed In

Forma Pauperis. By Order filed March 8, 2010, the Court directed the Clerk of Court to file

the Complaint and Application to Proceed, granted the Application to Proceed, and dismissed

the Complaint with leave to amend. On March 25, 2010, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Amend

Complaint (Doc. #13).

I. Motion

In his Motion to Amend, Plaintiff states that he had difficulty understanding the

screening Order and asks that the Court “allow him to file an indefinite leave in order to

continue with [the] complaint after his release date from the Department of Corrections.” 

The Court will not stay the proceedings in this case indefinitely. If Plaintiff is not

prepared to prosecute this action, he should file a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal. The Court

will grant Plaintiff a 30-day extension of time to file an amended complaint; Plaintiff will

Case 2:10-cv-00235-JWS Document 14 Filed 04/20/10 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

JDDL-K - 2 -

have 30 days from the filing date of this Order to file an amended complaint that complies

with the Court’s March 8, 2010 Order. 

II. Warnings

A. Release

Plaintiff must pay the unpaid balance of the filing fee within 120 days of his release.

Also, within 30 days of his release, he must either (1) notify the Court that he intends to pay

the balance or (2) show good cause, in writing, why he cannot. Failure to comply may result

in dismissal of this action.

B. Address Changes

Plaintiff must file and serve a notice of a change of address in accordance with Rule

83.3(d) of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff must not include a motion for other

relief with a notice of change of address. Failure to comply may result in dismissal of this

action.

C. Copies

Plaintiff must submit an additional copy of every filing for use by the Court. See

LRCiv 5.4. Failure to comply may result in the filing being stricken without further notice

to Plaintiff.

D. Possible “Strike”

Because the Complaint has been dismissed for failure to state a claim, if Plaintiff fails

to file an amended complaint correcting the deficiencies identified in the March 8, 2010

Order, the dismissal may count as a “strike” under the “3-strikes” provision of 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(g). Under the 3-strikes provision, a prisoner may not bring a civil action or appeal

a civil judgment in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 “if the prisoner has, on 3 or more

prior occasions, while incarcerated or detained in any facility, brought an action or appeal

in a court of the United States that was dismissed on the grounds that it is frivolous,

malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, unless the prisoner is

under imminent danger of serious physical injury.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). 

Case 2:10-cv-00235-JWS Document 14 Filed 04/20/10 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

JDDL-K - 3 -

E. Possible Dismissal

If Plaintiff fails to timely comply with every provision of the March 8, 2010 Order,

or this Order, including these warnings, the Court may dismiss this action without further

notice. See Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260-61 (9th Cir. 1992) (a district court may

dismiss an action for failure to comply with any order of the Court).

IT IS ORDERED: 

(1) Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend Complaint (Doc. #13) is denied.

(2) Plaintiff has 30 days from the date this Order is filed to file a first amended

complaint in compliance with the March 8, 2010 screening Order.

(3) If Plaintiff fails to file an amended complaint within 30 days, the Clerk of

Court must, without further notice, enter a judgment of dismissal of this action with prejudice

that states that the dismissal may count as a “strike” under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

DATED this 16th day of April, 2010.

Case 2:10-cv-00235-JWS Document 14 Filed 04/20/10 Page 3 of 3