Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_22-cv-00726/USCOURTS-caed-1_22-cv-00726-9/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Frank Chang
Defendant
John Louis Spears
Plaintiff

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOHN LOUIS SPEARS,

Plaintiff,

v.

FRANK CHANG,

Defendant.

Case No.: 1:22-cv-00726-SKO (PC)

ORDER EXTENDING STAY OF ACTION 

TO NOVEMBER 19, 2024

(Doc. 37)

Plaintiff John Louis Spears is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights 

action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

I. BACKGROUND

On March 4, 2024, Defendant Chang filed a Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint. 

(Doc. 31.) On April 2, 2024, after more than 21 days passed without Plaintiff having filed an 

opposition or statement of non-opposition in response, the Court issued its “Order to Show Cause 

(“OSC”) Why Sanctions Should Not Be Imposed for Plaintiff’s Failure to File an Opposition or 

Statement of Non-Opposition.” (Doc. 32.) Plaintiff was directed to respond within 21 days. (Id. at 

2.) 

On April 10, 2024, the United States Postal Service returned the OSC marked 

“Undeliverable, Unable to Forward.” (Docket entry dated 4/10/24.) The OSC was re-served to 

Plaintiff on May 2, 2024. (Docket Entry dated 5/2/24.) 

Case 1:22-cv-00726-KES-SKO Document 38 Filed 08/27/24 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

On May 1, 2024, Plaintiff filed a document titled “Motion to Stay Proceedings Due to 

Mental Health Treatment.”1(Doc. 33.) Defendants did not oppose the motion. 

On May 23, 2024, the Court issued its Order Granting Plaintiff’s Motion to Stay 

Proceedings and Staying Case for Ninety Days and Order Discharging Order to Show Cause. 

(Doc. 35.) Plaintiff was advised that if he believed a further stay of these proceedings was 

necessary, he should file a renewed request with the Court and indicate the length of any further 

stay sought. (Id. at 2-3.) On August 26, 2024, Plaintiff filed a document titled “Motion to Stay 

Proceedings Due to the Extension of Mental Health Treatment in the Psychiatric Inpatient 

Program (PIP).” (Doc. 37.) Plaintiff states he is “now receiving an additional 90 day[s]” treatment 

in the PIP program. (Id.) He adds that a further stay of 90 days will allow him to complete his 

mental health treatment at the appropriate level of care, to be discharged from the PIP program, 

and to be “endorsed/transferred to another prison facility.” (Id.) The Court finds a response by 

Defendants to be unnecessary. 

II. CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Based upon the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s motion to extend the stay these proceedings (Doc. 37) is GRANTED;

2. This action is STAYED to and including November 19, 2024;

2

and 

3. The deadline to oppose Defendant’s motion to dismiss will be re-set once the stay of 

these proceedings is lifted.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 27, 2024 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto .

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1 Plaintiff is presently housed at the California Medical Facility in Vacaville, California. His complaint 

concerns a claim arising at Salinas Valley State Prison.

2 5/23/24 + 90 days = 8/21/24. 8/21/24 + 90 days = 11/19/24. 

Case 1:22-cv-00726-KES-SKO Document 38 Filed 08/27/24 Page 2 of 2