Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-00030/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-00030-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
D. Gonzalez
Defendant
Vernon McNeal
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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

VERNON MCNEAL,

Plaintiff,

 v.

D. GONZALEZ,

 Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

1:14-cv-00030-BAM (PC)

ORDER DISREGARDING PLAINTIFF’S 

RESPONSE TO SCREENING ORDER

(ECF No. 13)

ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF 

TIME TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT

THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE 

Plaintiff Vernon McNeal (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On October 15, 2014, the Court 

dismissed Plaintiff’s complaint with leave to amend within thirty days. (ECF No. 10.) On 

October 29, 2014, the Court granted Plaintiff’s request for a thirty-day extension of time to file 

an amended complaint. (ECF No. 12.) Plaintiff’s first amended complaint was due on 

December 1, 2014. 

On December 1, 2014, in lieu of an amended complaint, Plaintiff filed a response to the 

Court’s screening order. (ECF No. 13.) Plaintiff’s response shall be disregarded. As stated in 

the order of October 15, 2014, Plaintiff’s complaint has been dismissed with leave to amend. 

Based on the dismissal, there is no operative complaint on file in this matter. Therefore, if 

Plaintiff wishes to pursue this action, he must file an amended complaint in compliance with the 

Court’s order. 

///

Case 1:14-cv-00030-BAM Document 14 Filed 12/02/14 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

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s response to the screening order, filed on December 1, 2014, is 

DISREGARDED;

2. Within thirty (30) days form the date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall file a first 

amended complaint; and

3. If Plaintiff fails to file a first amended complaint in compliance with this Court’s 

orders, this action will be dismissed for failure to obey court orders. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 2, 2014 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-00030-BAM Document 14 Filed 12/02/14 Page 2 of 2