Clark v. Brown
- Beth Freeman
- 5:21-cv-09230
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Clark v. Brown, Judge Freeman granted Alphonso Ramon Clark’s request for more time to file an amended complaint.
Alphonso Ramon Clark, whose request for more time was granted; Dr. Molly Brown and the other defendants remain subject to the amended pleading requirements.
What happened
In Clark v. Brown, Alphonso Ramon Clark, a state prisoner without a lawyer, asked for more time to amend his civil-rights complaint against Dr. Molly Brown and other defendants.
The court had dismissed Clark’s original complaint but allowed him to amend it by May 3, 2022. The court granted his timely request and gave him until June 1, 2022, to file an amended complaint on the court’s form.
Judge Beth Labson Freeman also said the amended complaint would replace the original complaint and that claims or defendants left out would no longer be part of the case. If Clark did not file it on time, the court said it would dismiss the action without prejudice and without further notice.
The detailed version
- Clark v. Brown · No. 5:21-cv-09230
- Beth Freeman
- May 9, 2022
Background
Alphonso Ramon Clark, identified as a state prisoner housed at Napa State Hospital, filed a civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 without a lawyer. The defendants are listed as Dr. Molly Brown and others.
On April 5, 2022, the court dismissed Clark’s original complaint but gave him permission to file an amended complaint. The court directed him to file it within 28 days, by May 3, 2022.
Motion and ruling
Clark filed a letter on April 29, 2022, asking for more time. The court treated the letter as a motion for an extension of time and granted the motion.
The court ordered Clark to file an amended complaint using the court’s form by June 1, 2022. It required him to answer all questions on the form and place the case number and the words “AMENDED COMPLAINT” on the first page.
Effect of the amended complaint
The court stated that the amended complaint would replace the original complaint. Claims not included in the amended complaint would no longer be claims, and defendants not named in it would no longer be defendants.
The court warned that failure to file the amended complaint by the deadline would result in dismissal of the action without prejudice and without further notice to Clark.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.