ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO AMEND, DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO FILE THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT LODGED ON DECEMBER 26, 2019, AND DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR EXPEDITED REVIEW OF THE THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT

[ECF Nos. 33, 34, 35]

STANLEY A. BOONE, Magistrate Judge.

Plaintiff Calvin Holt is appearing pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

On September 5, 2019, the undersigned screened Plaintiff's first amended complaint, found that no cognizable claims were stated, and granted Plaintiff thirty days to file a second amended complaint. (ECF No. 16.)

After receiving three extensions of time, Plaintiff filed a second amended complaint, along with a motion "for direct screening of second amended complaint" on December 18, 2019. (ECF Nos. 27, 28.) On December 20, 2019, the Court denied Plaintiff's request for expedited screening of the second amended complaint and advised Plaintiff that the second amended complaint would be screened in due course. (ECF No. 31.)

Currently before the Court is Plaintiff's motion to amend the complaint, a third amended complaint which was lodged, and a motion for direct screening of the third amended complaint, filed on December 26, 2019, respectively. (ECF Nos. 33, 34, 35.)

In his motion to amend, Plaintiff contends that his third amended complaint is timely filed under the Court's December 5, 2019, order and he wishes to add additional allegations not included in the second amended complaint. (ECF No. 33.) On the basis of good cause, the Court will grant Plaintiff's motion to amend and direct the Clerk of Court to file the third amended complaint. As Plaintiff was advised in the First Informational Order, "[t]his Court screens pro se plaintiff's complaints as expeditiously as possible. However, the Court has an extremely large number of pro se plaintiff civil rights cases pending before it, and delay is inevitable. As long as a party keeps the Court informed of the party's current address, the Court will provide notice of all actions which might affect the case as soon as an action is taken in the case." (ECF No. 3, Order at III (C).) The Court is aware of Plaintiff's action and will screen the complaint in due course. Plaintiff is advised that the Court will not file or respond in writing to any future requests for status of the case. Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion to expedite the screening of his third amended complaint will be denied.

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

IT IS SO ORDERED.