Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_23-cv-01491/USCOURTS-caed-1_23-cv-01491-8/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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KEVIN LAMAR PORTER,

Plaintiff,

v.

AMEZCUA, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:23-cv-01491-JLT-BAM (PC)

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ EX 

PARTE MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF 

RESPONSIVE PLEADING DEADLINE

(ECF No. 40)

Response to Second Amended Complaint

Due: February 3, 2025

Plaintiff Kevin Lamar Porter (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in 

forma pauperis in this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action proceeds on 

Plaintiff’s second amended complaint against: (1) Defendant Amezcua for retaliation in violation 

of the First Amendment and a related state law claim for violation of the Bane Act; (2) Defendant 

Amezcua for excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment and related state law claims 

for battery and violation of the Bane Act for slamming Plaintiff on the ground; (3) Defendants 

Amezcua, Chao, and John Does 1–5 for excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment 

and related state law claims for battery and violation of the Bane Act for forcefully moving 

Plaintiff despite his complaints of severe pain; and (4) Defendants Amezcua, Chao, John Does 1–

5, and Jane Does 1–2 for deliberate indifference to medical care in violation of the Eighth 

Amendment and a related claim for violation of the Bane Act.

Pursuant to the Court’s November 4, 2024, order finding service of the complaint 

appropriate and directing electronic service, Defendants Amezcua and Chao’s answers or other 

Case 1:23-cv-01491-JLT-BAM Document 41 Filed 12/30/24 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

responsive pleadings are due on or before January 3, 2025.

1

 (See ECF Nos. 33, 35.)

Currently before the Court is Defendants Amezcua and Chao’s ex parte motion for an 

extension of responsive pleading deadline, filed December 27, 2024. (ECF No. 40.) Plaintiff has 

not had the opportunity to respond to the motion, but the Court finds a response unnecessary. The 

motion is deemed submitted. Local Rule 203(l).

In support of the motion, counsel for Defendants Amezcua and Chao declares that 

although Plaintiff’s central file was received on December 17, 2024, defense counsel has not 

received Plaintiff’s medical records or other incident-related information. Defense counsel must 

review these documents to meaningfully discuss Plaintiff’s claims with Defendants, and to 

prepare an answer with substantive admissions, denials, and potential affirmative defenses. 

Defendants Amezcua and Chao therefore request a thirty-day extension of time, up to and 

including February 3, 2025, to respond to Plaintiff’s second amended complaint. (ECF No. 40.)

The Court, having considered the request, finds good cause to grant the requested 

extension of time. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b). The Court further finds that Plaintiff will not be 

prejudiced by the brief extension requested here.

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

1. Defendants’ ex parte motion for an extension of responsive pleading deadline, (ECF No. 

40), is GRANTED; and

2. Defendants Amezcua and Chao shall file and serve a response to the second amended 

complaint on or before February 3, 2025.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 30, 2024 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1 Defendants John Doe 1–5 and Jane Doe 1–2 have not yet been served. Plaintiff was directed to provide written 

notice identifying these defendants for service of process by February 5, 2025. (ECF No. 32.)

Case 1:23-cv-01491-JLT-BAM Document 41 Filed 12/30/24 Page 2 of 2