Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00345/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00345-8/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

SALVADOR SOLIS,

Plaintiff,

v.

MCKESSEN, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

1:05-CV-00345-OWW-NEW(DLB)-P

ORDER DENYING REQUEST TO EXTEND

DEADLINE TO AMEND COMPLAINT

(Doc. 29)

 Salvador Solis (“plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in

this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed this action on March 11,

2005. On May 18, 2007, plaintiff filed a declaration notifying the court of his intent to submit an

amended complaint and requesting an extension of time.

1. Plaintiff May Not Amend the Complaint Without Leave of Court

First, plaintiff may not amend the complaint at this stage of the proceedings without leave

of court. Under Rule 15(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a party may amend the

party’s pleading once as a matter of course at any time before a responsive pleading is served. 

Otherwise, a party may amend only by leave of the court or by written consent of the adverse

party, and leave shall be freely given when justice so requires. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a). In this case,

a responsive pleading was served when defendant filed an answer to the complaint on January

22, 2007. Plaintiff does not currently have leave of court to file an amended complaint. 

Although plaintiff was previously granted leave to amend the complaint by the court’s order of

Case 1:05-cv-00345-LJO-GSA Document 30 Filed 06/13/07 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

On May 25, 2006, plaintiff was given leave to amend the complaint within thirty days. On July 13, 2006, 1

the court granted plaintiff’s motion to extend the deadline for thirty days. Plaintiff did not file an amended complaint

within the deadline, and the deadline has expired.

2

May 25, 2006, the deadline has expired. Therefore, plaintiff may not amend the complaint 1

without further leave of court or defendant’s written consent. Plaintiff must file a motion to

amend together with a copy of his proposed amended complaint.

2. Plaintiff’s Motion Is Premature

 Second, plaintiff’s motion is premature. The current deadline for parties in this action to

amend pleadings, is July 26, 2007, as established by the court’s scheduling order of January 30,

2007. In light of the fact that the deadline is not close at hand, plaintiff’s request to extend the

deadline is premature and shall be denied.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s request for an extension of the

deadline to amend his complaint is DENIED without prejudice. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: June 12, 2007 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

3b142a UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00345-LJO-GSA Document 30 Filed 06/13/07 Page 2 of 2