Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00342/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00342-15/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

 On November 10, 2005, plaintiff’s conspiracy claim, due process claims, equal protection claim, claims

based on violation of the California Penal Code, and supervisory liability claims were dismissed, without prejudice,

for failure to state any claims upon which relief may be granted; and defendants Woodford, Scribner, SheppardBrooks, and Grandy were dismissed based on plaintiff’s failure to state any claims upon which relief may be granted

against them. (Doc. 21.) 

2

 Plaintiff’s motion was filed prior to the appearance of defendants Castro and Jackson in this action.

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ELROY W. BROWNING,

Plaintiff,

v.

JEANNE WOODFORD, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:05-CV-00342-AWI-LJO-P

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

TO SUPPLEMENT COMPLAINT,

CONSTRUED AS MOTION TO AMEND

COMPLAINT

(Doc. 39)

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK’S OFFICE TO

SEND PLAINTIFF A CIVIL RIGHTS

COMPLAINT FORM

Plaintiff Elroy W. Browning (“plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action is proceeding on

plaintiff’s complaint filed March 11, 2005, against defendants Castro, Jackson, and Lopez

(“defendants”) for use of excessive force, in violation of the Eighth Amendment.

1

 (Docs. 16, 21.)

On March 27, 2006, plaintiff filed a motion seeking leave to supplement his complaint to add a

claim. (Doc. 39.) Defendant Lopez filed an opposition to the motion on April 6, 2006.2 (Doc. 40.)

Rule 15(d) provides that “upon motion of a party the court may, upon reasonable notice and

upon such terms as are just, permit the party to serve a supplemental pleading setting forth

Case 1:05-cv-00342-AWI-GSA Document 50 Filed 05/31/06 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

transactions or occurrences or events which have happened since the date of the pleading sought to

be supplemented.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(d). In this instance, plaintiff’s claim against defendants arises

from an incident on April 1, 2004, in which plaintiff alleges defendants used excessive force against

him when they sprayed him with pepper spray for no reason and then subjected him to a hot shower.

Plaintiff seeks to add an Eighth Amendment claim of deliberate difference to his serious medical

needs arising from medical issues he allegedly developed on April 9, 2004, following the incident

in which he was sprayed with pepper spray. Because the events giving rise to the new claim

occurred prior to the filing of this suit, plaintiff’s motion shall be treated as one to amend the

complaint rather than supplement the complaint. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a). 

Pursuant to the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995, “[n]o action shall be brought with

respect to prison conditions under [42 U.S.C. § 1983], or any other Federal law, by a prisoner

confined in any jail, prison, or other correctional facility until such administrative remedies as are

available are exhausted.” 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). Exhaustion must occur prior to filing suit.

McKinney v. Carey, 311 F.3d 1198, 1199-1201 (9th Cir. 2002). The section 1997e(a) exhaustion

requirement applies to all prisoner suits relating to prison life, Porter v. Nussle, 435 U.S. 516, 532

(2002), and “[a]ll ‘available’ remedies must now be exhausted; those remedies need not meet federal

standards, nor must they be ‘plain, speedy, and effective.’” Porter, 534 U.S. at 524 (citing to Booth

v. Churner, 532 U.S. 731, 739 n.5 (2001)).

Plaintiff concedes that the delay in bringing his new claim was caused by his pursuit of

exhaustion of the administrative remedies. (Browning Dec., ¶6.) Plaintiff is precluded from

exhausting a claim and then seeking leave to amend to add the exhausted claim. 42 U.S.C. §

1997e(a); McKinney, 311 F.3d at 1199-1201. If plaintiff wishes to pursue his now-exhausted

medical claim, he must file a separate suit.

Accordingly, plaintiff’s motion seeking leave to supplement his complaint, construed as a

motion seeking leave to amend, is HEREBY DENIED. The Clerk’s Office is DIRECTED to send

///

///

///

Case 1:05-cv-00342-AWI-GSA Document 50 Filed 05/31/06 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

plaintiff a civil rights complaint form. If plaintiff wishes to file a new suit, he may fill out the

complaint form and mail it to the court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 30, 2006 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

b9ed48 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00342-AWI-GSA Document 50 Filed 05/31/06 Page 3 of 3