Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_24-cv-00383/USCOURTS-caed-1_24-cv-00383-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

THOMAS DORSEY,

Plaintiff,

v.

DONNY YOUNGBLOOD, et al.,

Defendants.

1:24-cv-00383-SKO (PC) 

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S 

REQUEST FILED DECEMBER 3, 2024

(Doc. 14)

Plaintiff Thomas Dorsey is a county jail inmate proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis

in a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. section § 1983. 

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff filed his original complaint on April 2, 2024. (Doc. 1.) On September 17, 2024, 

the Court issued its First Screening Order. (Doc. 11.) The Court found that Plaintiff’s complaint 

violated Rules 18 and 20 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and granted Plaintiff 21 days 

within which to file a first amended complaint, curing the deficiencies identified by the Court, or

to file a notice of voluntary dismissal. (Id. at 4-16.) On October 10, 2024, 

Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint. (Doc. 12.)

On December 3, 2024, Plaintiff filed a document titled “Request for An Addendum to 

First Amended Complaint.” (Doc. 14.) 

For the reasons discussed below, Plaintiff’s request will be denied. 

Case 1:24-cv-00383-SKO Document 15 Filed 12/05/24 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

II. DISCUSSION

Plaintiff seeks to add facts for “clarity to claim(s) already raised” in his first amended 

complaint. (Doc. 14.) As Plaintiff was previously advised in the Court’s First Screening Order, 

“an amended complaint must be ‘complete in itself without reference to the prior or superseded 

pleading.’ Local Rule 220.” (Doc. 11 at 15.) Plaintiff may not add facts to his first amended 

complaint by way of a separate “addendum.” All claims must be presented in a single pleading. 

Plaintiff will be given the opportunity to file a second amended complaint and to add facts 

he believes are relevant to his claims. Plaintiff must be mindful of the Court’s First Screening 

Order and its discussion and analysis to ensure any second amended complaint complies with the 

relevant screening and pleading requirements, particularly Rules 18 and 20 of the Federal Rules 

of Civil Procedure. 

Plaintiff is reminded that “an amended complaint supersedes the original complaint. Lacey 

v. Maricopa Cty., 693 F.3d 896, 927 (9th Cir. 2012).” (See Doc. 11 at 15.) Thus, any second 

amended complaint must be complete in and of itself without reference to any prior complaint or 

pleading. 

Plaintiff is also reminded that prisoner civil rights complaints must be screened pursuant 

to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). Plaintiff’s first amended complaint is currently pending screening. 

Should Plaintiff elect to file a second amended complaint, the Court will disregard the first 

amended complaint and will screen the second amended complaint in due course. In the event 

Plaintiff elects not to file a second amended complaint, the previously filed first amended 

complaint will be screened in due course. After the Court has determined that Plaintiff has 

asserted cognizable claims, the Court move on to service of any operative complaint. 

III. CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing, the Court ORDERS as follows:

1. Plaintiff’s request to file an addendum to his first amended complaint (Doc. 14) is 

DENIED;

2. If Plaintiff elects to file a second amended complaint, he SHALL do so within 30 

days of the date of service of this order. Any second amended complaint must be 

Case 1:24-cv-00383-SKO Document 15 Filed 12/05/24 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

3

complete in and of itself; and

3. If Plaintiff chooses not to file a second amended complaint, the Court will screen 

Plaintiff’s first amended complaint in due course. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 5, 2024 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto .

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:24-cv-00383-SKO Document 15 Filed 12/05/24 Page 3 of 3