Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-01373/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-01373-6/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KENNY CALIHAN,

Plaintiff,

v.

D. ADAMS, et al., 

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:09-cv-1373-MJS (PC)

ORDER RETURNING DOCUMENTS

SUBMITTED WITH DECLARATION

(ECF No. 31)

Plaintiff Kenny Calihan (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On August 6, 2010,

Plaintiff submitted a declaration with a number of “exhibits” attached. (ECF No. 31.) He

alleges that these exhibits support his claims currently pending before the Court. 

Plaintiff is advised that the Court cannot serve as a repository for the parties’

evidence. At this stage in the litigation, the Court must presume that all plausible

allegations contained in Plaintiff’s Complaint are true. See Warshaw v. Xoma Corp., 74

F.3d 955, 597 (9th Cir. 1996). Thus, no documentation is needed to support Plaintiff’s

allegations. If Plaintiff desires to amend his complaint to include information contained in

the materials attached to his declaration, he may do so without leave of the Court. See

Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 15(a)(1) (“A party may amend its pleading once as a matter of course.”)

As explained in the Court’s First Informational Order, the parties may not file

evidence with the Court until the course of litigation brings the evidence into question (for

example, on a motion for summary judgment, at trial, or when requested by the Court). 

Case 1:09-cv-01373-LJO-MJS Document 32 Filed 08/12/10 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

27

28

-2-

(ECF No. 3.) Plaintiff was previously informed that improperly submitted evidence would

be returned. (Id.)

Accordingly, the Clerk of Court is directed to return the declaration and supporting

documents to Plaintiff if they have not already been discarded. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 11, 2010 /s/Michael J. Seng 

ci4d6 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:09-cv-01373-LJO-MJS Document 32 Filed 08/12/10 Page 2 of 2