Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-00420/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-00420-3/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

Plaintiff Keith Duane Arline, Jr. is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights 

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

Now pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s fourth motion for an extension of time to file a 

second amended complaint. 

On October 3, 2013, the Court granted Plaintiff’s third motion for an extension of time to file 

the second amended complaint, and the second amended complaint was due on or before November 2, 

2013. In that order, the Court warned Plaintiff that because Plaintiff had been granted three extensions 

of time, no further extensions of time would be granted absence a showing of extraordinary 

circumstances, not present in the prior motion.

In this instant motion, Plaintiff has again failed to demonstrate “extraordinary circumstances” 

to justify a fourth extension of time to file the second amended complaint. Instead, Plaintiff continues 

to cite to the fact that he in July of this year he was placed in administrative segregation because he is 

KEITH DUANE ARLINE, JR.,

 Plaintiff,

v.

KEN CLARK, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:11-cv-00420-LJO-SAB (PC)

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S FOURTH 

MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO 

FILE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT AND 

SETTING DEADLINE TO FILE SECOND 

AMENDED COMPLAINT

[ECF No. 22]

Case 1:11-cv-00420-LJO-SAB Document 23 Filed 11/07/13 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

considered a security risk and he will not be released until January 2014. Plaintiff also cites that he 

has a total of three civil rights actions pending. The fact that Plaintiff has been placed in 

administrative segregation is his own doing and does not support the finding of “extraordinary 

circumstances.” In addition, the fact that he has three civil rights actions is not an “extraordinary 

circumstance.” 

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s fourth motion for an extension of time to file a second amended 

complaint is DENIED. Plaintiff has until December 2, 2013, to file the second amended complaint, or 

the Court will issue a recommendation that the action be dismissed, with prejudice, for failure to state 

a cognizable claim. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 6, 2013 _ _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:11-cv-00420-LJO-SAB Document 23 Filed 11/07/13 Page 2 of 2