(PC) Hawthorne v. Mendoza-Power et al, No. 1:2007cv01101 - Document 60 (E.D. Cal. 2009)
Court Description: ORDER Denying Plaintiff's Motion To Amend His Complaint, ORDER Granting In Part Second Motion To Extend Time To File Objections To Findings And Recommendations, (Docs. 49 , 59 ) Plaintiff's Objections Due Within Fifteen Days, signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 12/10/2009. (Objections to F&R due by 12/28/2009) (Scrivner, E)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Hawthorne v. Mendoza-Power et al Doc. 60 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RALPH KELLY HAWTHORNE, JR., CASE NO. 1:07-cv-01101-OWW-DLB (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO AMEND HIS COMPLAINT KATHY MENDOZA-POWERS, et al., ORDER GRANTING IN PART SECOND MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE OBJECTIONS TO FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 12 13 v. 14 15 16 Defendants. 17 ________________________________/ (Docs. 49, 59) PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTIONS DUE WITHIN FIFTEEN DAYS 18 19 Plaintiff is a prisoner proceeding pro se in a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 20 1983. On July 2, 2009, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting leave to file an amended complaint. 21 On December 7, 2009, plaintiff filed a motion to extend time to file objections to the Court's 22 September 30, 2009, Findings and Recommendations, which recommended dismissal for failure 23 to obey a court order. 24 25 26 Plaintiff states that he has completed his response to Defendants’ motion to dismiss. Plaintiff requests an extension of time to file his amended complaint with the Court. Leave to amend after appearance by the opposing is granted only with the opposing 27 party’s consent or the Court’s leave. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a). A review of the record indicates 28 that Defendants oppose any amendment to the complaint. (Doc. 51.) The Court sees no reason Dockets.Justia.com 1 to grant Plaintiff leave to amend his complaint, and Plaintiff presents no reasons to justify such a 2 grant. The Court will strike Plaintiff’s amended complaint if it is filed. 3 It is unclear whether or not Plaintiff’s response to the Defendants’ motion to dismiss will 4 address the Court’s Findings and Recommendations. Plaintiff will thus be granted a partial 5 extension of time. 6 Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 7 1. Plaintiff is granted fifteen (15) days from the date of service of this order in which 8 to file objections to the Court's September 30, 2009, Findings and 9 Recommendations; and 10 2. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Plaintiff’s motion for permission to file an amended complaint, filed on July 2, 2009, is denied. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: 3b142a December 10, 2009 /s/ Dennis L. Beck UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
