Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-01597/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-01597-1/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

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

KENNETH R. CALIHAN,

 Plaintiffs,

 vs.

C. KING, 

 Defendant.

1:16-cv-01597-LJO-GSA-PC

ORDER STRIKING DOCUMENTS

AS IMPROPERLY FILED

(ECF Nos. 10, 11, 12, 13.)

ORDER INFORMING PLAINTIFF 

OF HIS RIGHT TO FILE AN 

AMENDED COMPLAINT AS A 

MATTER OF COURSE

THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE TO FILE 

A FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

ORDER FOR CLERK TO SEND 

PLAINTIFF A CIVIL COMPLAINT 

FORM

Kenneth R. Calihan (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with this civil 

rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On October 24, 2016, Plaintiff filed the Complaint 

commencing this action. (ECF No. 1.) The Complaint awaits the Court’s requisite screening 

under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a).

I. BACKGROUND

On November 28, 2016 and December 2, 2016, inmate Matthew B. Cramer (“Cramer”), 

who is not a party to this case, filed two nearly identical1documents each titled “Notice of 

 

1 The two notices are identical except for some variation in the exhibits attached.

Case 1:16-cv-01597-LJO-GSA Document 15 Filed 01/04/17 Page 1 of 5
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

Liability for Retaliation Action,” requesting that “all E-Facility Staff” be barred from soliciting 

staff or other inmates to participate in retaliation. (ECF Nos. 10, 12.) Cramer’s name and 

address, not Plaintiff’s, appear at the top of each of the notices. In the case caption of each 

notice, Cramer’s name has been added as a plaintiff to this action, and new defendants have 

also been added. (Id.) Cramer and Plaintiff both signed the November 28, 2016 notice, (ECF 

No. 10 at 6); however, Cramer alone signed the December 2, 2016 notice, (ECF No. 12 at 6). 

On December 2, 2016, inmate Cramer filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis in 

this case. (ECF No. 11.)

On December 2, 2016, inmate Cramer filed a motion to amend the Complaint to add 

himself as a plaintiff to this case. (ECF No. 13.) Plaintiff signed the motion, but Cramer’s 

name and address appear at the top of the motion, and Cramer’s name has been added to the 

case caption as a plaintiff to this action. 

II DISCUSSION

The four documents submitted on November 28, 2016 and December 2, 2016 were 

improperly filed in this action because Cramer is not a party to this action and may not 

represent Plaintiff or file documents in this action. A non-lawyer may not represent anyone but 

himself or herself in court. Johns v. County of San Diego, 114 F.3d 874, 877 (9th Cir. 1997); 

C. E. Pope Equity Trust v. United States, 818 F.2d 696, 697 (9th Cir. 1987). Plaintiff is 

proceeding pro se in this action, which signifies that Plaintiff is acting as his own attorney in 

the litigation of this action. While inmate Cramer is not precluded from assisting Plaintiff and

other inmates with litigation, Bounds v. Smith, 430 U.S. 817, 823, 97 S.Ct 1491 (1977), he may 

not, as a non-lawyer, represent anyone but himself in court and may not file documents in this 

action on Plaintiff’s behalf, or on his own behalf as a non-party litigant.

Moreover, third parties may not appear as parties to a pending action simply by adding 

their names to the case caption as plaintiffs or defendants, and Plaintiff may not add plaintiffs 

or defendants to this case simply by adding their names to the case caption. Plaintiff’s 

Complaint in this case now proceeds with only one plaintiff (Kenneth R. Calihan) and one 

defendant (C. King). (ECF No. 1.) Therefore, the four documents filed in this case on 

Case 1:16-cv-01597-LJO-GSA Document 15 Filed 01/04/17 Page 2 of 5
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

November 28, 2016 and December 2, 2016, (ECF Nos. 10, 11, 12, 13), shall be stricken from 

the record as improperly filed.2

To add plaintiffs or defendants to the Complaint at this stage of the proceedings, 

Plaintiff must file an amended complaint. Plaintiff may file an amended complaint in this case 

as a matter of course.

3

 However, Plaintiff is advised that if he adds a new pro se 

prisoner/plaintiff to this case, it is likely that the Court will sever the new plaintiff’s claims and 

open a new, separate case for the new plaintiff, for which a filing fee must be paid. This is 

because in the Court’s experience, an action brought by multiple plaintiffs proceeding pro se in 

which one or more of the plaintiffs are in custody presents procedural problems that cause 

delay and confusion. Delay can arise from the transfer of prisoners to other facilities or 

institutions and the changes in address that occur when prisoners are released from custody. 

Further, the need for all plaintiffs to agree on all filings made in this action, and the need for all 

filings to contain the original signatures of all plaintiffs will lead to delay and confusion. 

Courts have broad discretion regarding severance to prevent delay or prejudice. See Coleman 

v. Quaker Oats Co., 232 F.3d 1271, 1297 (9th Cir. 2000); Lennar Mare Island v. Steadfast Ins. 

Co., No. 2:12-cv-02182-KJM-KJN, 2013 WL 6623855, *2 (E.D.Cal. Dec. 16, 2013). 

Plaintiff shall be granted thirty days in which to file an amended complaint, if he 

wishes.4 If Plaintiff chooses to amend the Complaint, he must demonstrate in his amended 

complaint how the conditions complained of have resulted in a deprivation of his constitutional 

rights. See Ellis v. Cassidy, 625 F.2d 227 (9th Cir. 1980). The amended complaint must allege 

in specific terms how each named defendant is involved. There can be no liability under 42 

 

2 A document which is “stricken” will not be considered by the court for any purpose. 

(Informational Order, ECF No. 3 at 2:7-8.)

3 Under Rule 15(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a party may amend the party’s 

pleading once as a matter of course at any time before a responsive pleading is served. Otherwise, a party may 

amend only by leave of the court or by written consent of the adverse party, and leave shall be freely given when 

justice so requires. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a). Because Plaintiff has not amended the complaint, and no responsive 

pleading has been served in this action, Plaintiff has leave to file an amended complaint as a matter of course.

4

If Plaintiff does not file an amended complaint pursuant to this order within thirty days, the 

Court shall assume that Plaintiff rests on the original Complaint.

Case 1:16-cv-01597-LJO-GSA Document 15 Filed 01/04/17 Page 3 of 5
4

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

U.S.C. § 1983 unless there is some affirmative link or connection between a defendant’s 

actions and the claimed deprivation. Rizzo v. Goode, 423 U.S. 36 (1976); May v. Enomoto, 

633 F.2d 164, 167 (9th Cir. 1980); Johnson v. Duffy, 588 F.2d 740, 743 (9th Cir. 1978). 

As a general rule, an amended complaint supersedes the original complaint. See Loux 

v. Rhay, 375 F.2d 55, 57 (9th Cir. 1967). Once an amended complaint is filed, the original 

complaint no longer serves any function in the case. Therefore, in an amended complaint, as in 

an original complaint, each claim and the involvement of each defendant must be sufficiently 

alleged. 

Plaintiff should note that although he has the opportunity to amend, it is not for the 

purpose of adding allegations of events occurring after October 24, 2016, the date the original 

Complaint was filed. Plaintiff may not change the nature of this suit by adding new, unrelated 

claims in his amended complaint.5 George v. Smith, 507 F.3d 605, 607 (7th Cir. 2007) (no

“buckshot” complaints). In addition, Plaintiff should take care to include only those claims that 

were exhausted prior to the initiation of this suit on October 24, 2016. 

Finally, Plaintiff is advised that Local Rule 220 requires that an amended complaint be 

complete in itself without reference to any prior pleading. The First Amended Complaint 

should be clearly and boldly titled “FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT,” refer to the 

appropriate case number, and be an original signed under penalty of perjury.

III. CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The four documents filed in this case on November 28, 2016 and December 2, 

2016, (ECF Nos. 10, 11, 12, 13), are STRICKEN from the record as improperly 

filed;

 

5

“The controlling principle appears in Fed. R. Civ. P. 18(a): ‘A party asserting a claim to relief 

as an original claim, counterclaim, cross-claim, or third-party claim, may join, either as independent or as alternate 

claims, as many claims, legal, equitable, or maritime, as the party has against an opposing party.’ Thus multiple 

claims against a single party are fine, but Claim A against Defendant 1 should not be joined with unrelated Claim 

B against Defendant 2. Unrelated claims against different defendants belong in different suits, not only to prevent 

the sort of morass [a multiple claim, multiple defendant] suit produce[s], but also to ensure that prisoners pay the 

required filing fees-for the Prison Litigation Reform Act limits to 3 the number of frivolous suits or appeals that 

any prisoner may file without prepayment of the required fees. 28 U.S.C. ' 1915(g).@ George, 507 F.3d at 607).

Case 1:16-cv-01597-LJO-GSA Document 15 Filed 01/04/17 Page 4 of 5
5

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. Plaintiff is informed that he has leave to amend the complaint once as a matter 

of course;

3. Plaintiff is granted thirty days from the date of service of this order in which to 

file a First Amended Complaint using the court’s form;

4. The First Amended Complaint should be clearly and boldly titled “First 

Amended Complaint,” refer to case number 1:16-cv-01579-LJO-GSA-PC, and 

be an original signed under penalty of perjury;

5. The Clerk of the Court shall send one civil rights complaint form to Plaintiff; 

and

6. If Plaintiff does not file an amended complaint within thirty days, the Court shall 

assume that Plaintiff rests on the original Complaint filed on October 24, 2016.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 4, 2017 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:16-cv-01597-LJO-GSA Document 15 Filed 01/04/17 Page 5 of 5