Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-01854/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-01854-12/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

MARVELLOUS A. GREENE, SR.,

Plaintiff, No. CIV 03-1854 DFL PAN P 

vs.

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT

OF CORRECTIONS, et al.,

Defendant. ORDER

 /

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

42 U.S.C. § 1983. On February 3, 2006, defendants filed a motion for summary judgment

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56. On February 10, 2006, plaintiff filed an

objection to the motion for summary judgment in which he stated that he would not file an

opposition to the motion for summary judgment until the court ruled on his September 19, 2005

motion for leave to file a second amended complaint. 

Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file a second amended complaint is not

accompanied by a proposed second amended complaint for the court to review. Cf. Fed. R. Civ.

P. 15; 28 U.S.C. § 1915A Moreover, the court cannot determine from the motion whether 

/////

/////

Case 2:03-cv-01854-GEB-EFB Document 89 Filed 06/16/06 Page 1 of 3
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

 On the same day that plaintiff filed his motion to amend, he filed a document styled an 1

“Ex Parte Motion Under Seal.” Plaintiff acknowledges that the material contained therein is not

relevant to matters at bar. The document will not be placed under seal. It will, however, be

disregarded. 

2

plaintiff might be able to present in a proposed second amended complaint factual allegations

that would support an additional claim for relief cognizable in this § 1983 action. For these

reasons, the motion will be denied.1

By order filed April 26, 2006, plaintiff was directed to file within thirty days an

opposition, if any he had, to the motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff did not respond in any

way to the court’s April 26, 2006 order. For that reason, on June 1, 2006, this court issued

findings and recommendations recommending that this action be dismissed pursuant to Fed. R.

Civ. P. 41(b). On June 9, 2006, plaintiff filed objections to the findings and recommendations.

In plaintiff’s objections, he states under penalty of perjury that he did not received

defendants’ motion because he was on suicide watch from late February until May 2006, that he

“hung himself” on March 7, 2006, and thereafter was in a crisis bed and did not receive any legal

mail. Good cause appearing, the findings and recommendations will be vacated and the court

will give plaintiff one final opportunity to file and serve an opposition to defendants’ motion for

summary judgment.

After review of the record herein, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY

ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s September 19, 2005 motion for leave to file a second amended

complaint is denied.

2. Plaintiff’s September 19, 2005 “Ex Parte Motion” shall be placed in the court

file and disregarded.

3. The findings and recommendations filed June 1, 2006 are vacated;

4. Defendants shall forthwith reserve a copy of their February 3, 2006 motion for

summary judgment and accompanying documents on plaintiff;

Case 2:03-cv-01854-GEB-EFB Document 89 Filed 06/16/06 Page 2 of 3
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

3

5. Plaintiff shall have thirty days thereafter to file and serve an opposition to

defendants’ motion;

6. Defendants’ reply, if any, shall be filed and served not later than ten days

thereafter; and

7. No extensions of the deadlines set in this order will be granted for any reason. 

DATED: June 15, 2006.

/gree1854.vac

Case 2:03-cv-01854-GEB-EFB Document 89 Filed 06/16/06 Page 3 of 3