Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-00822/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-00822-2/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

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

Plaintiff William Luna is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action 

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

On July 25, 2014, Plaintiff filed a second amended complaint following the Court’s May 9, 

2014, screening order. 

On August 4, 2014, Plaintiff filed a motion relating to the filing of the second and/or third 

amended complaint. Plaintiff requests that following the Court’s statutory screening of the second 

amended complaint, the Court dismiss any and all claims and/or defendants if he has not cured the 

deficiencies outlined in the Court’s May 9, 2014, order.

///

///

///

///

WILLIAM LUNA,

 Plaintiff,

v.

MATTHEW CATE, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:13-cv-00822-SAB (PC)

ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION 

RELATING TO FILING OF SECOND AND/OR 

THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT

[ECF No. 29]

Case 1:13-cv-00822-DAD-SAB Document 30 Filed 08/22/14 Page 1 of 2
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

Plaintiff is advised that the Court will conduct its statutory screening pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§1915A of Plaintiff’s second amended complaint in due course and the Court will determine which, if 

any, claims are cognizable. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s present motion requesting dismissal of certain 

claims and/or defendants for failure to state a cognizable claim for relief is premature and is DENIED 

on such basis. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 21, 2014 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:13-cv-00822-DAD-SAB Document 30 Filed 08/22/14 Page 2 of 2