Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-00125/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-00125-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Igbanosa
Defendant
Austin Willis
Plaintiff
James Yates
Defendant

Document Text:

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

AUSTIN WILLIS,

Plaintiff,

v.

JAMES YATES, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

1:08-cv-00125-OWW-SMS-PC

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR

SCREENING ORDER

 

ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF 

TIME TO FILE RESPONSE TO COMPLAINT

 

This is a civil action filed by plaintiff Austin Willis (“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 1, 2007 (Case #07CECG03256). On January 24, 2008, defendants Yates and

Igbanosa (“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 defendants

indicates that defendants received a copy of the complaint on December 27, 2007. Defendants have

requested that the court screen plaintiff’s complain pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and grant

defendants an extension of time in which to file a responsive pleading. On March 3, 2008, plaintiff

filed a response in opposition to the removal. (Doc. 5.)

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-00125-OWW -SMS Document 8 Filed 07/03/08 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 between October 25, 2005 and April 2006, his rights to adequate

medical care and safe prison conditions under the Eighth Amendment and state tort law were

violated when defendants exposed him to aspartame and Valley fever. Because defendants Yates

and Igbanosa were employed as a Warden and Chief Medical Doctor, respectively, at a state prison

when the alleged events occurred, the court is required to screen the complaint. Therefore,

defendants' motion for the court to screen the complaint shall be granted. In addition, good cause

appearing, the motion for extension of time shall also be granted.

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Defendants' motion for the court to screen the complaint is GRANTED, and the court

shall issue a screening order in due time; and

2. Defendants 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: July 3, 2008 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:08-cv-00125-OWW -SMS Document 8 Filed 07/03/08 Page 2 of 2