Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00882/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00882-0/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMES ERVIN JONES,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-05-0882 FCD DAD P

vs.

EL DORADO COUNTY BOARD

OF SUPERVISORS, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with this civil

rights action seeking relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

On June 13, 2006, this court determined that plaintiff’s original complaint

appeared to state cognizable claims for relief against the El Dorado County Board of Supervisors

and Sheriff Jeff Neves. The court ordered plaintiff to complete and return to the court, within

thirty days, the USM-285 forms and other documents necessary to effect service on defendants.

On July 12, 2006, plaintiff submitted the necessary forms and documents in

accordance with this court’s order. On the same day, plaintiff also filed a request for leave to file

an amended complaint, alleging he failed to properly identify all of the defendants in his original

complaint. 

/////

Case 2:05-cv-00882-FCD-DAD Document 13 Filed 09/18/07 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

2

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide that a party may amend his or her

pleading “once as a matter of course at any time before a responsive pleading is served.” Fed. R.

Civ. P. 15(a). However, plaintiff is advised that an amended or supplemental complaint

supersedes the original complaint. See Loux v. Rhay, 375 F.2d 55, 57 (9th Cir. 1967). Once an

amended pleading is filed, the original pleading no longer serves any function in the case. Id.;

see also E.D. Local Rule 15-220. Although the allegations of this pro se complaint are held to

“less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers,” Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S.

519, 520 (1972) (per curiam), plaintiff will be required to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure and the Local Rules of the Eastern District of California.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s July 12, 2006 request for leave to file an amended complaint is

granted; and 

2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to discard the summons, the USM-285

forms, and other documents necessary to effect service on defendants submitted by plaintiff on

July 12, 2006.

DATED: September 17, 2007.

DAD:9

jone0882.10

Case 2:05-cv-00882-FCD-DAD Document 13 Filed 09/18/07 Page 2 of 2