Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00102/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00102-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

REGGIE L. McCOY, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

v. )

)

)

PAUL SCHULTZ, WARDEN, )

)

Respondent. )

)

___________________________________ )

CV F 05 - 0102 AWI WMW HC

ORDER GRANTING MOTION

TO AMEND FILED

FEBRUARY 3, 2005, AND

DENYING ALL FURTHER

MOTIONS TO AMEND AS

MOOT

[Doc. 4, 7, 11] 

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas

corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On February 3, 2005 (Doc. 4), March 28, 2005 (Doc.

7), and April 7, 2005 (Doc. 11) Petitioner filed motions to amend his petition.

A petitioner may amend a petition for writ of habeas corpus once “as a matter of

course,” and without leave of court, before a response has been filed under Federal Rule of

Civil Procedure 15(a), as applied to habeas corpus actions pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2242 and

Rule 11 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. Calderon v. United States District

Court (Thomas), 144 F.3d 618, 620 (9th Cir. 1998); Bonn v. Calderon, 59 F.3d 815, 845 (9th

Case 1:05-cv-00102-AWI-WMW Document 14 Filed 05/16/05 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

Cir. 1995). Leave of court is required for all other amendments. Rule Civ. P. 15(a). While

the court should freely give leave to amend if justice requires, the Court may deny leave to

amend if the amendment would be futile or subject to dismissal. Bonn, 59 F.3d at 845; Saul

v. United States, 928 F.2d 829, 843 (9th Cir. 1991).

No response has yet been filed in this case. Therefore, Petitioner may amend his

pleading once without permission of the court. For the sake of clarity, this court HEREBY

GRANTS Petitioner’s motion to amend his petition filed February 3, 2005, and DENIES his

subsequent petitions to amend as moot. Petitioner is granted thirty (30) days from the date of

service of this order within which to file his Amended Petition. Petitioner should carefully

note that because an amended pleading supersedes the original pleading, an amended

pleading must be complete in itself without reference to any prior pleading. Local Rule 15-

220; Loux v. Rhay, 375 F.2d 55, 57 (9th Cir. 1967). Accordingly, Petitioner must include all

of his claims in his Amended Petition.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 13, 2005 /s/ William M. Wunderlich 

bl0dc4 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00102-AWI-WMW Document 14 Filed 05/16/05 Page 2 of 2