Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-00585/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-00585-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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

Defendants also request the court to take note of plaintiff's "three-strikes" status under 18 U.S.C. § 1

1915(g). The Prison Litigation Reform Act provides that a prisoner is prohibited from bringing a civil action in forma pauperis

"if the prisoner has, on 3 or more occasions, while incarcerated or detained in any facility, brought an action or appeal in a court

of the United States that was dismissed on the grounds that it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief

may be granted, unless the prisoner is under imminent danger of serious injury.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). However, due to

payment of the filing fee in full on April 28, 2008, the statute does not apply to plaintiff in this action.

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LAFAYETTE CADE,

Plaintiff,

v.

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF

CORRECTIONS, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

1:08-cv-00585-LJO-GSA-PC

ORDER GRANTING REQUEST FOR

SCREENING ORDER

 

ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF 

TIME TO FILE RESPONSE TO COMPLAINT

 

This is a civil action filed by plaintiff Lafayette Cade (“plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding

pro se. This action was initiated by civil complaint filed by plaintiff in the Fresno County Superior

Court on October 28, 2007 (Case #07 CE CG 03639 DRF). On April 28, 2008, defendants Brewer,

Daley, Davis, Fugate, Hatten, Reeves, Shannon, and Trimble (“defendants”) removed the case to

federal court by filing a Notice of Removal of Action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b). (Doc.1.)

In the Notice of Removal, counsel for defendant indicates that defendants were served by substituted

service on March 28, 2008. Defendants have requested that the court screen plaintiff’s complaint

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and grant defendants an extension of time in which to file a

responsive pleading.1

The court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against a

governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). 

Case 1:08-cv-00585-WHA Document 3 Filed 06/30/08 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

Plaintiff’s complaint alleges that his rights to due process and access to the courts under the

Fourteenth Amendment and state law were violated when defendants interfered with his ability to

file and litigate cases in state and federal court. Because defendants were employed by the California

Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation at a state prison when the alleged events occurred, the

court is required to screen the complaint. Therefore, defendants' request for the court to screen the

complaint shall be granted. In addition, good cause appearing, the request for extension of time shall

also be granted.

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The request for the court to screen the complaint, filed by defendants Brewer, Daley,

Davis, Fugate, Hatten, Reeves, Shannon, and Trimble is GRANTED, and the court

shall issue a screening order in due time; and

2. Defendants Brewer, Daley, Davis, Fugate, Hatten, Reeves, Shannon, and Trimble

are GRANTED an extension of time until thirty days from the date of service of the

court's screening order in which to file a response to the complaint.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: June 30, 2008 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

6i0kij UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:08-cv-00585-WHA Document 3 Filed 06/30/08 Page 2 of 2