(PC) Smith v. Diaz ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 LARRY SMITH, No. 2:20-cv-1004 CKD P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 RALPH DIAZ, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 On December 27, 2021, plaintiff filed a motion for an extension of time to file a second 18 amended complaint. Good cause appearing, that request will be granted. 19 On December 6, 2021, plaintiff filed a motion asking that the court order that he be 20 transferred to a different prison.1 Generally speaking, the court does not have the authority to 21 dictate where a prisoner is housed within a state’s correctional system. See Meachum v. Fano, 22 427 U.S. 215 (1976). Plaintiff fails to point to anything suggesting departure from that rule is 23 appropriate here. 24 ///// 25 ///// 26 ///// 27 1 In the same motion, plaintiff asks that the court order the return of his personal and legal 28 property. Plaintiff withdrew this request in his December 27 motion. ] Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. Plaintiffs motion for an extension of time (ECF No. 30) is granted. 3 2. Plaintiff is granted thirty days from the date of this order in which to file a second 4 | amended complaint. Failure to file a second amended complaint within 30 days will result in a 5 || recommendation that this action be dismissed without prejudice. 6 3. Plaintiff's request that the court order plaintiff transferred to a different prison (ECF 7 || No. 26) is denied. 8 || Dated: January 3, 2022 / a8 } i | Ld , a ce CAROLYNK. DELANEY 10 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 1] 12 13 1/mp smit1004.36(6) 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28