Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01445/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01445-3/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LEVI SMITH,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-05-1445 MCE JFM P

vs.

CLAIRE TESKE, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

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

civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On September 29, 2005, plaintiff filed a

document styled “Correction to Complaint – Medical Indifference.” By this document, plaintiff

seeks to correct the address for defendant Dr. Christison and to add a new defendant, Dr. Hawley.

Plaintiff will be given an opportunity to correct defendant Christison’s address

should service against said defendant be returned unexecuted. It is not necessary to amend the

complaint solely to correct said defendant’s address. 

The document contains no allegations against Dr. Hawley, nor any indication why

plaintiff believes he has a cognizable civil rights claim against said doctor. In addition, plaintiff

has not filed a proposed amended complaint. Local Rule 15-220 requires that the operative 

/////

Case 2:05-cv-01445-MCE -JFM Document 15 Filed 10/24/05 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

pleading in any action be complete in itself without reference to prior pleadings. For these

reasons, the court will not authorize this action to proceed against Dr. Hawley at this time. 

On October 11, 2005, plaintiff filed a request for clarification of his in forma

pauperis status. In this document, he requests relief from payment of the statutory filing fee for

this action. This court is not authorized to relieve plaintiff from the obligation to pay the filing

fee by partial payments, in accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b). Plaintiff’s

request will therefore be denied.

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s September 29, 2005 request to add a new defendant is denied

without prejudice; and

2. Plaintiff’s October 11, 2005 request for relief from the obligation to pay the

filing fee for this action in accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b) is denied.

DATED: October 21, 2005. 

12

smit1445.o

Case 2:05-cv-01445-MCE -JFM Document 15 Filed 10/24/05 Page 2 of 2