Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_11-cv-01890/USCOURTS-azd-2_11-cv-01890-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Riki Rashaad Muhammad, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Arizona Department of Corrections, et al.,

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-11-1890-PHX-SMM-LOA

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s “Motion for Leave to Amend

Complaint” filed on June 21, 2012. (Doc. 22) 

Plaintiff commenced his action on September 26, 2011, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

(Doc. 1) The Court dismissed the Complaint with leave to amend on November 15, 2011,

for failure to state a claim. (Doc. 7) Plaintiff submitted his First Amended Complaint on

December 16, 2011, doc. 9, and ultimately, the Court ordered service of the First Amended

Complaint on Defendant Aames and dismissed the remaining Defendants and claims. (Doc.

12) Thereafter, on April 12, 2012, and again on May 29, 2012, Plaintiff sought leave to

amend and/or correct his First Amended Complaint. (Docs. 13, 17) The Court denied both

of Plaintiff’s Motions because neither complied with the Local Rules of Civil Procedure

(“LRCiv”) 15.1. (Docs. 14, 20) 

As stated in the prior Orders, because Plaintiff has previously amended his Complaint,

he needs leave to further amend his Complaint. Fed.R.Civ.P. 15. Rule 15(a) of the Federal

Case 2:11-cv-01890-SMM-JFM Document 23 Filed 07/17/12 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 -

Rules provides that leave to amend should be freely given “when justice so requires.” This,

however, does not relieve Plaintiff from his responsibility to additionally comply with the

Local Rules.

It appears that Plaintiff has complied with the Local Rules in his most recent attempt

to amend his Complaint. Consistent with LRCiv 15.1, Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint

indicates how it differs from the pleading it is amending by delineating in the text what is

to be deleted and by underlining what is to be added. The Court will direct the Plaintiff to

file a “clean” copy of the Second Amended Complaint with the Clerk of Court. It shall be

identical to the version submitted in doc. 22, without any underlining or lines through

stricken language. It shall stand alone as its own document. 

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint, doc. 22,

is GRANTED. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall file a “clean” Second Amended

Complaint that mirrors identically what he filed in Doc.22 without any underlining or lines

through stricken language within fourteen (14) days from the date of this Order. No

additional information may be added. Once the Court has received the Second Amended

Complaint, the Court shall screen the Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a).

Dated this 17th day of July 2012. 

Case 2:11-cv-01890-SMM-JFM Document 23 Filed 07/17/12 Page 2 of 2