Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00633/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00633-5/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ARTAY SCRUGGS,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-06-0633 FCD DAD P

vs.

S. VANCE, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to

42 U.S.C. § 1983. On May 31, 2007, the court granted plaintiff a second extension of time to file

his opposition to defendants’ amended motion to dismiss, filed on March 20, 2007. On August

23, 2007, plaintiff filed a request for an extension of time and a “First Amended Complaint.” 

The amended complaint presents the same failure to protect claim and names the same

defendants as in plaintiff’s original complaint. However, the amended complaint also provides

several pages of allegations concerning the exhaustion of administrative remedies. Therefore, the

court will construe the section of plaintiff’s amended complaint, titled “Exhaustion of Legal

Remedies” as plaintiff’s opposition to the motion to dismiss. As set forth below, the court will

also provide plaintiff a limited time period to file any supplemental opposition to the pending

motion. 

Case 2:06-cv-00633-KJN Document 27 Filed 09/07/07 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

2

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s August 23, 2007 request for an extension of time is denied as

unnecessary;

2. The court construes that portion of plaintiff’s “First Amended Complaint,”

filed on August 23, 2007, and titled “Exhaustion of Legal Remedies,” as plaintiff’s opposition to

defendants’ amended motion to dismiss;

3. On or before September 21, 2007, plaintiff may file a supplemental opposition

to defendants’ amended motion to dismiss; the supplemental opposition shall be titled,

“Supplemental Opposition to Defendants’ Amended Motion to Dismiss; and no further

extensions of time will be granted for this purpose; and 

4. Defendants may file their reply within thirty days after the filing of plaintiff’s

supplemental opposition, or if no supplemental opposition is filed, within thirty days after the

deadline for the filing of the supplemental opposition. 

DATED: September 6, 2007.

DAD:4

scru0633.supOp

Case 2:06-cv-00633-KJN Document 27 Filed 09/07/07 Page 2 of 2