Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-04696/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-04696-0/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

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOSEPH VICTOR LAGANA,

Plaintiff,

v.

SAN MATEO COUNTY SHERIFF, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 15-cv-04696-YGR (PR)

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF LEAVE 

TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT;

DIRECTING HIM TO FILE PRISONER 

IN FORMA PAUPERIS APPLICATION; 

AND ADDRESSING HIS OTHER 

PENDING MOTIONS

On October 9, 2015, Plaintiff, who was previously in custody at the Maguire Correctional 

Facility, filed the present pro se civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On that same date, 

the Clerk of the Court sent Plaintiff a notice directing him to pay the filing fee or to submit a 

completed prisoner in forma pauperis (“IFP”) application form, trust account statement and 

certificate of funds. On October 26, 2015, Plaintiff filed an incomplete prisoner IFP application,

in which he indicated he was “out of custody.” Dkt. 5 at 4.

On November 18, 2015, the Court ordered Plaintiff to file a new non-prisoner application 

to proceed IFP within twenty-eight days. Dkt. 6 at 2. Plaintiff has since filed his non-prisoner IFP 

application. Dkt. 12.

Before the Court are various motions filed by Plaintiff, including: (1) a motion for 

sanctions; (2) a motion for service by the United States Marshal; and (3) a document entitled, 

“Motion for Extension of Time to Amend Complaint,” which the Court construes as a motion for 

leave to file an amended complaint. Dkts. 9, 10, 11. Plaintiff has also informed the Court that he 

is now “in custody with the Los Angeles Sheriff[’s] Department.” Dkt. 9 at 1.

A plaintiff may amend his complaint once as a matter of course at any time before a 

responsive pleading is served. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a). Where a plaintiff seeks to amend after a 

responsive pleading has already been served, however, the decision whether to grant leave to

amend is committed to the sound discretion of the trial court. Waits v. Weller, 653 F.2d 1288, 

1290 (9th Cir. 1981). Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) is to be applied liberally in favor of 

amendments and, in general, leave shall be freely given when justice so requires. Janicki Logging 

Case 4:15-cv-04696-YGR Document 13 Filed 02/02/16 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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

Co. v. Mateer, 42 F.3d 561, 566 (9th Cir. 1994).

The Court notes that the defendants in this action have not been served at this time. As 

mentioned above, Plaintiff may as a matter of course amend his complaint because a responsive 

pleading has not yet been served. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a). The Court finds that it is in the 

interests of justice to allow Plaintiff to amend his complaint. See Janicki Logging Co., 42 F.3d at 

566. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file an amended complaint is GRANTED. Dkt. 

9. The Court notes that Plaintiff has not attached a proposed amended complaint to his motion. 

Therefore, the Court directs Plaintiff to file his amended complaint on the attached prisoner civil 

rights complaint form no later than March 18, 2016.

Because Plaintiff is amending his complaint, his motion for service by the United States 

Marshal is DENIED as premature. Dkt. 11.

Plaintiff’s motion for sanctions is also DENIED as premature as no defendant has been 

served with the complaint in this matter. Dkt. 10.

Finally, because Plaintiff is back in custody, he cannot proceed with his non-prisoner IFP 

application. In order for the Court to assess whether he is entitled to proceed IFP, he must now 

complete a new prisoner IFP application. Plaintiff shall answer all questions in the attached 

application and shall provide any requisite documentation (which he did not provide previously). 

He shall file his completed application no later than March 18, 2016. The failure to do so will 

result in the dismissal of this action without prejudice.

Plaintiff’s non-prisoner IFP application to proceed IFP is DENIED as moot. Dkt. 12.

The Clerk shall send Plaintiff a blank civil rights complaint form and a blank prisoner IFP 

application form along with a copy of this Order.

This Order terminates Docket Nos. 9, 10, 11 and 12.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:

______________________________________

YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS

United States District Court Judge

February 2, 2016

Case 4:15-cv-04696-YGR Document 13 Filed 02/02/16 Page 2 of 2