Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-00982/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-00982-1/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JABARI HALEEM MUIED,

Plaintiff,

v.

B. MAYFIELD,

Defendant.

Case No. 1:19-cv-0982-LJO-JLT (PC)

ORDER DENYING AS MOOT 

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO 

AMEND AND REQUIRING PLAINTIFF

TO FILE A RESPONSE

(Doc. 12)

THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE

Plaintiff moves for leave to amend his complaint. Because plaintiff may amend his 

complaint once as a matter of course, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a), this motion will be denied as moot. 

However, it is not clear whether the document that plaintiff filed with his motion is itself 

the amended complaint. Instead, it appears that plaintiff is referencing allegations from the original 

complaint and including additional commentary related to exhibits attached to the instant motion. 

But nowhere in this second document does plaintiff provide the factual basis of his claims. Insofar 

as plaintiff is asking the Court to peruse the exhibits in order to determine the factual basis of his 

claim, this is improper. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a) (a pleading must contain “a short and plain 

statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief”). If, on the other hand, plaintiff 

seeks to supplement the original complaint, he is hereby informed that an amended complaint 

supersedes the prior complaint, see Loux v. Rhay, 375 F.2d 55, 57 (9th Cir. 1967), and it must be 

“complete in itself without reference to the prior or superseded pleading,” Local Rule 220. It is also 

Case 1:19-cv-00982-DAD-JLT Document 13 Filed 01/10/20 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

possible that plaintiff is merely supporting his motion with information as to how he would amend 

his original complaint. Since the submission of this document raises several questions, plaintiff will 

be directed to file a response. 

Accordingly, the Court DENIES as moot plaintiff’s motion to amend. Within thirty days, 

plaintiff is directed to inform the Court as to which of the documents (Docs. 1, 12) serves as the 

operative pleading in this case. Alternatively, plaintiff may file a new pleading titled “First 

Amended Complaint” within thirty days from the date of this order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 9, 2020 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:19-cv-00982-DAD-JLT Document 13 Filed 01/10/20 Page 2 of 2