Clark v. Brown

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 ALPHONSO RAMON CLARK, Case No. 21-09230 BLF (PR) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE 13 v . AMENDED COMPLAINT 14 DR. MOLLY BROWN, et al., 15 Defendants. (Docket No. 5) 18 Plaintiff, a state prisoner currently housed at Napa State Hospital, filed a pro se civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Dkt. No. 1. On April 5, 2022, the Court dismissed the complaint with leave to amend. Dkt. No. 3. Plaintiff was directed to file an amended complaint within twenty-eight days from the date the order was filed, i.e., no later than May 3, 2022. Id. 23 On April 29, 2022, Plaintiff filed a letter requesting an extension of time to file an amended complaint, which the court construes as a motion for an extension of time. Dkt.

25 No. 5. The timely filed request is GRANTED. Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint using the court’s form complaint to attempt to correct the deficiencies in the original complaint no later than June 1, 2022.

1 || order, i.e., Case No. C 21-09230 BLF (PR), and the words “AMENDED COMPLAINT” || on the first page. Plaintiff must answer all the questions on the form in order for the action || to proceed. Plaintiff is reminded that the amended complaint supersedes the original, and || Plaintiff may not make references to the original complaint. Claims not included in the || amended complaint are no longer claims and defendants not named in an amended || complaint are no longer defendants. See Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1262 (9th {| Cir. 1992).

8 Failure to respond in accordance with this order by filing an amended || complaint in the time provided will result in the dismissal of this action without || prejudice and without further notice to Plaintiff.

11 IT ISSO ORDERED. «12 || Dated: _ May 9, 2022 tp) BETH LABSON FREEMAN 13 United States District Judge

Oo Z 18 Order Granting Mot. for EOT to File Am. Compl.

27 PRO-SE\BLF\CR.21\09230Clark_eot-ac