Hurley

(PC) Diaz v. Hurley

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaAugust 28, 20202:19-cv-01241California836 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MIGUEL ENRIQUE DIAZ, No. 2:19-cv-1241 KJM KJN P Plaintiff, v. ORDER ASSOCIATE WARDEN HURLEY, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding pro se. By order filed June 11, 2020, plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed, and plaintiff was granted thirty days in which to file an amended complaint. On July 9, 2020, plaintiff was granted an additional 45 days in which to amend. On July 14, 2020, plaintiff filed a motion for investigation, and on July 17, 2020, plaintiff filed a motion for relief from alleged retaliation. (ECF Nos. 32, 33.) First, plaintiff is advised that this court does not investigate claims for litigants. If plaintiff believes his rights under Coleman are being violated, he must bring such allegations to the attention of counsel for the plaintiff class in Coleman. Second, in his motion concerning retaliation, plaintiff claims that he was put in quarantine on July 9, 2020, allegedly…

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.