(PC)Sutton v. Altamirano ( 2024 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DONTE SUTTON, Case No. 1:23-cv-01633-BAM (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE 13 v. AMENDED COMPLAINT 14 ALTAMIRANO, et al., (ECF No. 9) 15 Defendants. THIRTY (30) DAY DEADLINE 16 17 Plaintiff Donte Sutton (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 18 pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On April 25, 2024, the Court 19 screened the complaint and granted Plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint or a notice of 20 voluntary dismissal within thirty days. (ECF No. 8.) 21 Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for a thirty-day extension of time to file 22 his amended complaint, filed May 28, 2024. (ECF No. 9.) Plaintiff states that he has requested 23 documents from CDCR containing dates and times certain and other information regarding his 24 representations to correctional staff of suicidal ideations, including medical records documenting 25 his suicide attempts and treatment, but not limited thereto. The information contained in these 26 documents is essential to the preparation of a detailed amended complaint as ordered. Plaintiff 27 was not told by prison officials when he would receive the documents or how long it was going to 28 take to provide those documents. Without the information in those documents, Plaintiff cannot 1 prepare a successful amended complaint in conformity with Rule 8. (Id.) 2 Having considered the request, Plaintiff has shown good cause for the requested extension 3 of time. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b). 4 Plaintiff is reminded that his first amended complaint should be brief, Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a), 5 but it must state what each named defendant did that led to the deprivation of Plaintiff’s 6 constitutional rights, Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678–79 (2009). Although accepted as true, 7 the “[f]actual allegations must be [sufficient] to raise a right to relief above the speculative 8 level . . . .” Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (citations omitted). 9 Additionally, Plaintiff may not change the nature of this suit by adding new, unrelated 10 claims in his first amended complaint. George v. Smith, 507 F.3d 605, 607 (7th Cir. 2007) (no 11 “buckshot” complaints). 12 Finally, Plaintiff is advised that an amended complaint supersedes the original complaint. 13 Lacey v. Maricopa Cty., 693 F.3d 896, 927 (9th Cir. 2012). Therefore, Plaintiff’s amended 14 complaint must be “complete in itself without reference to the prior or superseded pleading.” 15 Local Rule 220. 16 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 17 1. Plaintiff’s motion for extension of time, (ECF No. 9), is GRANTED; 18 2. Within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall file a first 19 amended complaint curing the deficiencies identified by the Court’s April 25, 2024 20 screening order (or file a notice of voluntary dismissal); and 21 3. If Plaintiff fails to comply with this order, this action will be dismissed, with 22 prejudice, for failure to obey a court order and for failure to state a claim. 23 IT IS SO ORDERED. 24 25 Dated: May 29, 2024 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 26 27 28