ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENAS AS MOOT

(ECF NO. 28)

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST TO EXTEND THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AMENDED PLEADINGS.

AMENDED PLEADINGS DEADLINE SEPTEMBER 5, 2016.

(ECF No. 32)

STANLEY A. BOONE, District Judge.

Plaintiff Jeremiah Vickers is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

On May 16, 2016, Plaintiff filed a motion titled as "motion for objection to production of records and Defendants' counsel's noncompliance with rules." (ECF No. 28.) In his motion, Plaintiff seeks to quash two subpoenas he received on March 30, 2016. The Court therefore construes this as a motion to quash subpoenas. On May 19, 2016, Defendants filed opposition to the motion. (ECF No. 31.) On July 21, 2016, Plaintiff filed a motion for extension of time to file an amended complaint. (ECF No. 32.)

I.

MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENAS

Plaintiff seeks an order quashing two subpoenas that he received on March 30, 2016. One of the subpoenas was addressed to Plaintiff in Delano, California, where Plaintiff was previously housed. The other subpoena was sent to Plaintiff from the company that received the subpoena. Plaintiff seeks an order quashing the subpoenas based on Counsel's failure to serve the subpoenas on Plaintiff at his address of record. Defendants oppose the motion.

Defendants indicate that it appears that both subpoenas at issue inadvertently and mistakenly reflect Plaintiff's previous address at Delano, rather than his current address at Lancaster. Defendants' opposition is supported by the declaration of counsel. Counsel declares that on May 16, 2016, she received a copy of the motion that is now before the Court. On the same date, counsel received Plaintiff's original signature, dated May 9, 2016, expressly authorizing Corizon Health and Tulare County Health and Human Services Agency to release his medical and mental health records to her office. On May 17, 2016, counsel's office instructed Complex Legal Services to withdraw both subpoenas due to her office's inadvertent mistake referencing Plaintiff's previous address. On the same date, counsel drafted a letter to Plaintiff acknowledging the error and informing him that as a result both subpoenas have been withdrawn. (Terrible Decl. ¶¶ 3-6.) The motion to quash subpoenas is therefore moot.

II.

MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME

Plaintiff seeks a sixty day extension of time to file an amended complaint. (ECF No. 32.) Plaintiff indicates that due to delays in providing access to the law library at his institution, he has been unable to review the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and obtain the necessary materials in order to file his amended complaint by the August 5, 2016, deadline to filing to amend pleadings set forth in the February 5, 2016, discovery and scheduling order. (ECF No. 21.) Plaintiff is advised that he may not file an amended complaint without leave of Court, and without the opportunity for Defendants to oppose any motion for leave to file an amended complaint. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2), because Defendants have filed a responsive pleading, Plaintiff may only amend his complaint with leave of Court. Therefore, the Court will construe Plaintiff's motion as a motion to extend the deadline to file amended pleadings, and grant Plaintiff an extension of time to September 5, 2016, in which to file a motion for leave to file an amended complaint. Plaintiff is advised that any such motion must be accompanied by a proposed amended complaint.

III.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

IT IS SO ORDERED.