Filed: Feb. 08, 2017
Latest Update: Feb. 08, 2017
Summary: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY DOES 1 THROUGH 3 SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FROM THE ACTION THIRTY DAY DEADLINE STANLEY A. BOONE , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff Dale L. Cottrell is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. On October 23, 2014, the Court screened Plaintiff's second amended complaint and found that it stated a claim against Defendants Berard, Das, Duenas, Igbinosa, Lackey, Ogbuehi, Park and Does 1 through 3, for deliberate indifferen
Summary: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY DOES 1 THROUGH 3 SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FROM THE ACTION THIRTY DAY DEADLINE STANLEY A. BOONE , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff Dale L. Cottrell is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. On October 23, 2014, the Court screened Plaintiff's second amended complaint and found that it stated a claim against Defendants Berard, Das, Duenas, Igbinosa, Lackey, Ogbuehi, Park and Does 1 through 3, for deliberate indifferenc..
More
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY DOES 1 THROUGH 3 SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FROM THE ACTION THIRTY DAY DEADLINE
STANLEY A. BOONE, Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff Dale L. Cottrell is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On October 23, 2014, the Court screened Plaintiff's second amended complaint and found that it stated a claim against Defendants Berard, Das, Duenas, Igbinosa, Lackey, Ogbuehi, Park and Does 1 through 3, for deliberate indifference to a serious medical need in violation of the Eighth Amendment. (ECF No. 24.) The discovery and scheduling order in this action was entered on April 16, 2016, with the deadline to file any amended pleading of October 16, 2015. (ECF No. 36 at 2.) Plaintiff did not move to file an amended complaint prior to the deadline to amend the complaint. On July 25, 2016, Defendants Berard, Das, Duenas, Igbinosa, Lackey, Ogbuehi, and Park filed a motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 78.)
In this instance, Plaintiff has been given ample opportunity to conduct discovery and to file an amended complaint as to the identity of the "Doe" Defendants, yet he has failed to do. Accordingly, Plaintiff is directed to show cause within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order as to why these "Doe" Defendants should not be dismissed from the action.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
