Headen

Headen v. Scott

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaSeptember 22, 20223:22-cv-01146California634 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 BRIAN CHRISTOPHER HEADEN, Case No. 22-cv-01146-EMC

Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S

v. MOTION FOR EXTENSION, AND

DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO

JOSEPH C. SCOTT, et al., APPOINT COUNSEL Defendants. Docket No.

12 13 The Court received Plaintiff’s Complaint in the instant civil rights action on February 24, 2022. See Docket No. 1 (“Complaint”). That same day, Magistrate Judge Illman received a similar complaint from Plaintiff. See Docket No. 1, Headen v. San Mateo County, Case No. 22- cv-1145-RMI. After the case before Judge Illman was dismissed, Plaintiff stated that he wished to consolidate the two actions. See Docket No. 22, Headen v. San Mateo County, Case No. 22-cv- 1145-RMI (summarizing Plaintiff’s communications). The Court granted Plaintiff time to amend the Complaint filed in this action to state all of his claims. See Docket No. 12. Two months later, plaintiff filed four hundred pages of addenda…

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.