Trate

(PC) Hill v. Trate

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJuly 9, 20251:24-cv-00823California719 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 THOMAS AUSTIN HILL, Case No. 1:24-cv-00823-KES-BAM (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

FOR EXTENSION OF TIME

13 v. (ECF No. 20) 14 TRATE, et al.,

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO

15 Defendants. RE-SERVE JUNE 11, 2025 SCREENING ORDER (ECF No. 19) 16

THIRTY (30) DAY DEADLINE

17 18 Plaintiff Thomas Austin Hill (“Plaintiff”) is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se and in 19 forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of 20 Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). 21 On June 11, 2025, the Court screened the first amended complaint and found that it failed 22 to state a claim. (ECF No. 19.) Plaintiff was directed to file a second amended complaint or a 23 notice of voluntary dismissal within thirty days of service of that order. (Id. at 9.) 24 Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s request for extension and request that the Court 25 label his mail as legal, filed July 1, 2025. (ECF No. 20.) …

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.