Macomber

(PS) Nible v. Macomber

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaAugust 21, 20242:24-cv-01259California1,526 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 WILLIAM LYLE NIBLE, Case No. 2:24-cv-1259-DJC-CSK Plaintiff, v. ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF

TIME TO SERVE AND DENYING MOTION

JEFF MACOMBER, et al., TO SUPPLEMENT WITHOUT PREJUDICE Defendants. (ECF Nos. 13, 14) 16 On May 1, 2024, Plaintiff William Lyle Nible, who is proceeding pro se, filed a complaint that named Jeff Macomber and Tommee Dorsey as defendants. (ECF No. 1). On July 1, 2024, Plaintiff filed his first amended complaint, naming as defendants Macomber, Dorsey, and nine new defendants: “Jessika Richardson, Alison Woodruff, Jason Johnson, Stephenie Reyes, Mr. Lugar, H. Mosley, Julie Raskin-Lee, Mr. St. Louis, and Broomfield.” (ECF No. 11). Presently pending before the Court are Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file a supplemental complaint (ECF No. 13) adding Jadi Howard as a defendant, and a motion for extension of time to serve all defendants (ECF No. 14).1 For the reasons that follow, Plaintiff’s…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.