Jeremy Guzman v. Rodriguez, et al.

Opinion

JEREMY GUZMAN, Case No. 1:25-cv-00902-BAM Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE v. AMENDED COMPLAINT RODRIGUEZ, et al., (ECF No. 13) Defendants. THIRTY (30) DAY DEADLINE Plaintiff Jeremy Guzman (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On February 10, 2026, the Court screened the complaint and granted Plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint or notice of voluntary dismissal within thirty days. (ECF No. 12.) Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for a thirty-day extension of time to file his amended complaint, filed March 6, 2026. (ECF No. 13.) Plaintiff states that he received the Court’s order on February 19, 2026, but was not given a day at the legal library until February 27, 2026, because the prison is on a mass lockdown due to major violence. Plaintiff requests an additional thirty days due to the lockdown, late mail, and no law library access. (Id.) Having considered the motion, Plaintiff has shown good cause for the requested extension of time. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b). Plaintiff is reminded that his first amended complaint should be brief, Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a), but it must state what each named defendant did that led to the deprivation of Plaintiff’s constitutional rights, Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678–79 (2009). Although accepted as true, the “[f]actual allegations must be [sufficient] to raise a right to relief above the speculative level . . . .” Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (citations omitted). Additionally, Plaintiff may not change the nature of this suit by adding new, unrelated claims in his first amended complaint. George v. Smith, 507 F.3d 605, 607 (7th Cir. 2007) (no “buckshot” complaints). Finally, Plaintiff is advised that an amended complaint supersedes the original complaint. Lacey v. Maricopa Cty., 693 F.3d 896, 927 (9th Cir. 2012). Therefore, Plaintiff’s amended complaint must be “complete in itself without reference to the prior or superseded pleading.” Local Rule 220. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Plaintiff’s motion for extension of time, (ECF No. 13), is GRANTED; 2. Within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall file a first amended complaint curing the deficiencies identified by the Court’s February 10, 2026 screening order (or file a notice of voluntary dismissal); and 3. If Plaintiff fails to comply with this order, this action will be dismissed, with prejudice, for failure to obey a court order and for failure to state a claim. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 9, 2026 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE