Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-01189/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-01189-2/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

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

SHANNON RILEY, 

 Plaintiff,

 v.

TALLERICO, et al.,

 Defendants.

1:16-cv-01189-EPG (PC)

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION 

TO EXPEDITE

(ECF NO. 15)

Shannon Riley (APlaintiff@) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis

in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ' 1983. On August 12, 2016, Plaintiff filed his 

first amended complaint. (ECF No. 5). On that same day, Plaintiff filed a request for judicial 

notice. (ECF No. 6). Because it was unclear whether Plaintiff was attempting to amend his 

complaint via the request for judicial notice, on November 15, 2016, the Court ordered Plaintiff 

to file a second amended complaint or notify the Court that he wishes to proceed on the first 

amended complaint. (ECF No. 14). On November 21, 2016, Plaintiff filed a motion to 

expedite. (ECF No. 15). Plaintiff seems to be asking the Court to expedite the screening of his 

case. 

Plaintiff’s motion to expedite will be denied. First, the Court is currently waiting on 

Plaintiff to either file a second amended complaint or notify the Court that he wishes to proceed 

Case 1:16-cv-01189-AWI-EPG Document 16 Filed 11/22/16 Page 1 of 2
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

on the first amended complaint. Second, as laid out in the First Informational Order in 

Prisoner/Civil Detainee Civil Rights Cases (ECF No. 4), which was sent to Plaintiff on August 

11, 2016, the Court has an extremely large number of pro se civil rights cases pending before it, 

and is acting on those cases as quickly and efficiently as it can with the court’s resources.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion to expedite is DENIED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 22, 2016 /s/

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:16-cv-01189-AWI-EPG Document 16 Filed 11/22/16 Page 2 of 2