(PC) Smith v. Diaz

Opinion

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