Bratton v. Broomfield

CourtDistrict Court, N.D. California
DecidedJanuary 26, 2022
Docket5:20-cv-03885
StatusUnknown

This text of Bratton v. Broomfield (Bratton v. Broomfield) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bratton v. Broomfield, (N.D. Cal. 2022).

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10

11 RONALD W. BRATTON, Case No. 20-03885 BLF (PR)

12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING IN PART MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF 13 v . TIME TO FILE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 14 RON BROOMFIELD, et al.,

15 Defendants.

16 (Docket No. 17)

17 18 Plaintiff, a state prisoner, filed a pro se civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 19 1983 against prison staff at San Quentin State Prison. Dkt. No. 1. On December 29, 2021, 20 the Court dismissed the amended complaint with leave to amend. Dkt. No. 16. Plaintiff 21 was directed to file a second amended complaint by January 25, 2022. Id. 22 Plaintiff has filed a motion for an extension of time to file a second amended 23 complaint due to limited law library access. Dkt. No. 17. Plaintiff has requested a sixty- 24 day extension of time. Id. Good cause appearing, the motion is GRANTED IN PART. 25 Plaintiff shall file a second amended complaint using the court’s form complaint to attempt 26 to correct the deficiencies in the amended complaint no later than twenty-eight days (28) 27 from the date this order is filed. Plaintiff may move for additional time if necessary. 1 The second amended complaint must include the caption and civil case number 2 || used in this order, i.e., Case No. C 20-03885 BLF (PR), and the words “SECOND 3. || AMENDED COMPLAINT” on the first page. Plaintiff must answer all the questions on 4 || the form in order for the action to proceed. Plaintiff is reminded that the second amended 5 || complaint supersedes the amended, and Plaintiff may not make references to the amended 6 || complaint. Claims not included in the second amended complaint are no longer claims and 7 || defendants not named in a second amended complaint are no longer defendants. See 8 || Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1262 (9th Cir.1992),. 9 Failure to respond in accordance with this order by filing a second amended 10 || complaint in the time provided will result in the dismissal of this action without 11 || prejudice and without further notice to Plaintiff. 3 (12 This order terminates Docket No. 17. E B IT IS SO ORDERED. 14 Dated: — January 26, 2022 iy) BETH LABSON FREEMAN 15 United States District Judge 16

Oo Z 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 || pRo-stsBLFCR 20\03885traton cot SAC

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Michael Henry Ferdik v. Joe Bonzelet, Sheriff
963 F.2d 1258 (Ninth Circuit, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Bratton v. Broomfield, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bratton-v-broomfield-cand-2022.