Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_11-cv-01856/USCOURTS-azd-2_11-cv-01856-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
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

 To date, those efforts have been unsuccessful.

WO SC

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

George Wilson Overturf, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Janice K. Brewer, et al., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 11-1856-PHX-GMS (DKD)

ORDER

Plaintiff George Wilson Overturf, who is confined in the Arizona State Prison

Complex, Central Unit, in Florence, Arizona, filed a pro se civil rights Complaint pursuant

to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, which the Court dismissed with leave to amend. (Doc. 1, 7.) Plaintiff

filed a First Amended Complaint and a motion for appointment of counsel. (Doc. 15, 16.)

The Court dismissed the First Amended Complaint with leave to amend and denied the

motion to appoint counsel. (Doc. 17.) The Court stated, however, that it would request

counsel to represent Plaintiff pro bono and to file a notice of appearance within 30 days.1

(Id.) Plaintiff filed a motion to extend the deadline for filing a second amended complaint

until April 16, 2012. (Doc. 22.) 

In an Order filed on April 11, 2012, the Court granted Plaintiff 30 days in which to

file a second amended complaint. (Doc. 24.) The day after that Order was filed, and before

Plaintiff received a copy of that Order, Plaintiff filed two motions to compel discovery and

another motion for extension of time in which to file a second amended complaint. For the

Case 2:11-cv-01856-GMS--BSB Document 28 Filed 04/16/12 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

27

28

- 2 -

reasons discussed in the April 11 Order, Plaintiff’s motions to compel discovery will be

denied as premature. 

Plaintiff also seeks an extension until June 16, 2012 in which to file a second amended

complaint. (Doc. 27.) Plaintiff primarily seeks the extension because he has not received

responses to his discovery requests. However, unless and until Plaintiff files a second

amended complaint that states a claim against one or more defendants, and the Court requires

a response thereto, discovery is premature. Plaintiff otherwise seeks an extension because

he has not yet received new glasses, which would better enable him to read the rules of

procedure. Plaintiff is referred to the Instructions for completing the court-approved form

complaint and this Court’s February 16, 2012 Order as guidance in preparing a second

amended complaint. Specifically, Plaintiff is referred to the standards to state the type of

claims that Plaintiff seeks to present, which is discussed in that Order. Finally, Plaintiff also

seeks the name of potential pro bono counsel; that request will be denied because, to date,

no attorney has agreed to represent Plaintiff in this action pro bono. Plaintiff’s motion for

an extension until June 16, 2012 will be denied. 

Warnings

A. Release

Plaintiff must pay the unpaid balance of the filing fee within 120 days of his release.

Also, within 30 days of his release, he must either (1) notify the Court that he intends to pay

the balance or (2) show good cause, in writing, why he cannot. Failure to comply may result

in dismissal of this action.

B. Address Changes

Plaintiff must file and serve a notice of a change of address in accordance with Rule

83.3(d) of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff must not include a motion for other

relief with a notice of change of address. Failure to comply may result in dismissal of this

action.

C. Copies

Plaintiff must submit an additional copy of every filing for use by the Court. See

Case 2:11-cv-01856-GMS--BSB Document 28 Filed 04/16/12 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

27

28

- 3 -

LRCiv 5.4. Failure to comply may result in the filing being stricken without further notice

to Plaintiff.

D. Possible “Strike”

Because the Complaint and First Amended Complaint have been dismissed for failure

to state a claim, if Plaintiff fails to file an amended complaint correcting the deficiencies

identified in the February 16, 2012 Order, the dismissal may count as a “strike” under the “3-

strikes” provision of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Under the 3-strikes provision, a prisoner may not

bring a civil action or appeal a civil judgment in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 “if

the prisoner has, on 3 or more prior 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 physical injury.” 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(g). 

E. Possible Dismissal

If Plaintiff fails to timely comply with every provision of the February 16, 2012 Order

or this Order, including these warnings, the Court may dismiss this action without further

notice. See Ferdik, 963 F.2d at 1260-61 (a district court may dismiss an action for failure to

comply with any order of the Court).

IT IS ORDERED: 

(1) Plaintiff’s motions to compel discovery are denied. (Doc. 25, 26.)

(2) Plaintiff’s motion for an extension of time to file an amended complaint is

denied. (Doc. 27.) 

DATED this 16th day of April, 2012.

Case 2:11-cv-01856-GMS--BSB Document 28 Filed 04/16/12 Page 3 of 3