Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-01330/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-01330-5/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DESHONE LEE SMITH, 

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-07-1330 LKK CMK P

vs.

OFFICER S. CSER,

Defendant. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant

to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the court is a complaint (Doc. 23) and an application to

proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 24) filed November 20, 2007.

The undersigned issued findings and recommendations on November 19, 2007,

recommending plaintiff’s first amended complaint (Doc. 11) be dismissed for failure to state a

cause of action. Plaintiff’s original complaint was filed on July 6, 2007. Plaintiff then filed an

amended complaint on September 18, 2007 (Doc. 11). This amended complaint was filed as a

matter of course pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15. The only defendant named in

plaintiff’s amended complaint is defendant Cser. 

Plaintiff has now filed another complaint in this matter, naming as defendants

officers J. Torrez, Sly, Stewart, Abshire, Pellard, Ziebert, and Drennan. Plaintiff wrote on the top

of the page this case number, and the Clerk of the Court docketed this complaint as an amended

complaint in this case. However, plaintiff has not obtained leave of court to file an amended

complaint in this matter. Even though no defendant has appeared in this case, plaintiff is

Case 2:07-cv-01330-LKK -CMK Document 26 Filed 11/29/07 Page 1 of 2
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

2

required to obtain leave of court to file another amended complaint. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15. His

second amended complaint will therefore be stricken. This case will proceed on the first

amended complaint, and the findings and recommendations filed on November 19, 2007, are not

altered. Plaintiff still has until December 10, 2007 to file any objections he has to the findings

and recommendations. 

It appears possible to the court that plaintiff may have actually meant to file this

complaint in as a new case, and not as an amended complaint in this matter. The defendants

listed in the second amended complaint do not match the defendants listed in his original or first

amended complaint, and plaintiff filed a new application to proceed in forma pauperis. However,

as plaintiff supplied the court with the above case number, this is where his complaint was

docketed. Therefore, if plaintiff intended to file this complaint as a new case, he should notify

the court within 30 days. Otherwise, plaintiff must obtain leave of court to file any further

amendments in this case.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s amended complaint (Doc. 23) is stricken, as filed without leave

of court;

2. Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 24) is denied as

duplicative;

3. Any amended complaint in this case must be filed with leave of court; and

4. If plaintiff intended to file this complaint as a new case, he is to notify the

court within 30 days of the date of this order.

DATED: November 29, 2007

______________________________________

CRAIG M. KELLISON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:07-cv-01330-LKK -CMK Document 26 Filed 11/29/07 Page 2 of 2