Moore v. Hatton ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JOHNNY ANDREW MOORE, 11 Case No. 20-01445 BLF (PR) Plaintiff, 12 ORDER SUA SPONTE GRANTING v. EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE 13 AMENDED COMPLAINT 14 S. HATTON, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 Plaintiff, a California inmate, filed a pro se complaint in Monterey County Superior 19 Court, which Defendants removed to this Court under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1441(a), 1446(b). Dkt. 20 No. 1. On July 7, 2020, the Court granted Defendants’ request to screen the complaint, 21 dismissed the Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference claim as barred by res judicata, 22 and dismissed the First Amendment retaliation claim with leave to amend. Dkt. No. 7 at 3- 23 4. Plaintiff was directed to file an amended complaint within twenty-eight days from the 24 date the order was filed. Id. at 4. Plaintiff was also advised that in the alternative, he may 25 file notice in the same time provided that he wishes to strike all the federal claims from 26 this action and have the matter remanded back to state court to pursue the sole state law 27 claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress. Id. at 5. 1 || Plaintiff filed two motions requesting an extension of time “to prepa[re] response to order 2 || granting motion for dismissal with leave to amend complaint” in a different case which is 3 || closed. See Moore v. Hatton, et al., Case No. 17-03696 BLF (PR), Dkt. Nos. 35, 38. 4 || Apparently, Plaintiff has his case numbers confused. Accordingly, in the interest of 5 || justice, the Court will sua sponte grant Plaintiff an extension of time to file an amended 6 || complaint in this matter. 7 Within twenty-eight (28) days from the date this order is filed, Plaintiff shall file 8 || an amended complaint using the court’s form complaint to attempt to state sufficient facts g || to state a First Amendment retaliation claim. The amended complaint must include the 10 || caption and civil case number used in this order, i.e., Case No. C 20-01445 BLF (PR), and 11 || the words “AMENDED COMPLAINT” on the first page. Plaintiff must not make any 2 reference to Case No. 17-03696 BLF, which is a closed matter, to avoid any further E 13 || delays in this matter. Plaintiff must answer all the questions on the form in order for the S 14 || action to proceed. Plaintiff is reminded that the amended complaint supersedes the 3 15 || original, and Plaintiff may not make references to the original complaint. Claims not 16 || included in the amended complaint are no longer claims and defendants not named in an 5 17 || amended complaint are no longer defendants. See Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1262 5 18 || (9th Cir.1992). 19 Failure to respond in accordance with this order by filing an amended 20 || complaint in the time provided will result in the dismissal of this action without 21 || prejudice and without further notice to Plaintiff. 22 IT ISSO ORDERED. 23 || Dated: __ September 9, 2020 fete Liye rooncan/ 54 BETH ABSON F REEMAN United States District Judge 25 26 || pRo-siABLnicR 200144SMooreeotae 27