Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-02108/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-02108-9/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

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

THURMAN LEROY SPENCER,

Plaintiff,

v.

S. PAINTER, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:13-cv-02108 KJM DAD P

FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

On April 10, 2014, plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed for failure to allege facts sufficient 

to state a claim against the named defendants. (ECF No. 18.) By that same order, plaintiff was 

granted thirty days in which to file an amended complaint. (Id.) On May 15, 2015, plaintiff was 

granted an additional thirty days in which to file an amended complaint. (ECF No. 22.) When 

plaintiff then failed to file an amended complaint, the undersigned issued findings and 

recommendations, dated June 25, 2014, recommending that this action be dismissed without 

prejudice. (ECF No. 24.) 

Plaintiff subsequently requested a copy of the docket in this action, and, on January 20, 

2015, filed a notice with the court stating that he did not receive the court’s May 15, 2015 order. 

(ECF No. 26.) On January 27, 2015, based on plaintiff’s representations, the undersigned vacated 

the June 25, 2014 findings and recommendations, and granted plaintiff an additional thirty days in 

which to file an amended complaint. (ECF No. 27.) On March 9, 2015, plaintiff was granted an 

Case 2:13-cv-02108-KJM-AC Document 39 Filed 09/30/15 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

additional thirty days in which to file an amended complaint. (ECF No. 29.) On April 8, 2015, 

plaintiff was granted yet another extension of time until April 19, 2015 to file an amended 

complaint. (ECF No. 31.) On April 28, 2015, plaintiff was granted an additional thirty days in 

which to file an amended complaint. (ECF No. 33.) The April 28, 2015 order, however, included 

a warning to plaintiff that “absent extraordinary circumstances, no motions or requests, such as 

for appointment of legal counsel, access to legal property, or access to plaintiff’s central file, may 

be used by plaintiff as a basis to seek an extension of time to file an amended complaint.” (Id. at 

5.)

More than five months have now passed since plaintiff was last ordered to file an 

amended complaint, yet plaintiff has failed to do so.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without 

prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 

after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 

with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings 

and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified 

time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 

(9th Cir. 1991).

Dated: September 29, 2015

DAD:10

spen2108.fta.ext

Case 2:13-cv-02108-KJM-AC Document 39 Filed 09/30/15 Page 2 of 2