(PC)Brown v. State of California et al, No. 2:2012cv03045 - Document 19 (E.D. Cal. 2013)

Court Description: ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 12/9/13 ORDERING that The findings and recommendations filed on November 16, 2013 16 arevacated; The Clerk of the Court shall send plaintiff a copy of the courts October 2, 2013 order 12 ; and Plaintiff is granted thirty days from the date of service of this order to file a third amended complaint.(Dillon, M)

Download PDF
(PC)Brown v. State of California et al Doc. 19 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DEXTER BROWN, 12 13 14 15 No. 2:12-cv-03045 MCE AC Plaintiff, v. ORDER STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel. Plaintiff seeks relief pursuant to 18 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and is proceeding in forma pauperis. This proceeding was referred to this court 19 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Rule 302. 20 On May 6 and May 20, 2013, plaintiff filed a first and second amended complaint, 21 respectively. ECF Nos. 10, 11. On October 2, 2013, this court issued an order dismissing 22 plaintiff’s first and second amended complaints, and granting plaintiff thirty days to file a third 23 amended complaint. ECF No. 12. 24 Plaintiff failed to file a third amended complaint within thirty days. As a result, on 25 November 12, 2013, this court issued findings and recommendations recommending dismissal of 26 this action. ECF No. 16. Plaintiff was given twenty-one days to file objections to the findings 27 and recommendations. Id. The findings and recommendations were re-served on plaintiff at his 28 new location, pursuant to plaintiff’s November 7, 2013 notice of change of address. See ECF No. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 14. 2 On November 19 and November 21, 2013, plaintiff filed letters describing various alleged 3 misconduct such as mail tampering, food poisoning and compelled psychotropic medications. 4 ECF Nos. 17, 18. To an extent, plaintiff’s letters are not germane to the claims presented in his 5 first and second amended complaints. It is unclear to the court whether plaintiff received the 6 October 2, 2013 order dismissing his amended complaints and granting him leave to file a third 7 amended complaint. While the order was not returned as undeliverable, nothing in plaintiff’s 8 recent correspondence indicates his awareness of either the October 2, 2013 order or the court’s 9 subsequent November 12, 2013 findings and recommendations. 10 Given plaintiff’s recent communications, and out of an abundance of caution, the court 11 will vacate the November 12, 2013 findings and recommendations, and grant plaintiff an 12 additional thirty days from the date of this order to file a third amended complaint in accordance 13 with the court’s October 2, 2013 order. Plaintiff is hereby cautioned that failure to file a third 14 amended complaint within thirty days from the date of this order will result in a 15 recommendation that plaintiff’s action be dismissed. 16 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 17 1. The findings and recommendations filed on November 16, 2013 (ECF No. 16) are 18 vacated; 19 2. The Clerk of the Court shall send plaintiff a copy of the court’s October 2, 2013 order 20 (ECF No. 12); and 21 ///// 22 ///// 23 ///// 24 ///// 25 ///// 26 ///// 27 ///// 28 ///// 2 1 3. Plaintiff is granted thirty days from the date of service of this order to file a third 2 amended complaint that complies with the requirements of the Civil Rights Act, the Federal Rules 3 of Civil Procedure, and the Local Rules of Practice; the third amended complaint must bear the 4 docket number assigned this case and must be labeled “Third Amended Complaint”; plaintiff 5 must file an original and two copies of the third amended complaint; failure to file a third 6 amended complaint in accordance with this order will result in a recommendation that this action 7 be dismissed. 8 DATED: December 9, 2013 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

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.