Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-01734/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-01734-3/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

Plaintiff Jose Guadalupe Calderon is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights 

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 

Plaintiff filed the instant case on December 12, 2019. On December 19, 2019, the Court 

screened Plaintiff’s complaint, found he failed to state any cognizable claims, and granted leave to file 

an amended complaint within thirty days. (ECF No. 6.) 

Plaintiff filed an amended complaint on January 6, 2020. (ECF No. 7.) On January 9, 2020, 

the Court issued Findings and Recommendations recommending that the action be dismissed for 

failure to state a cognizable claim for relief. (ECF No. 9.) 

On January 21, 2020, Plaintiff filed a motion for an extension of time to file objections to the 

Findings and Recommendations, which was granted on January 23, 2020. (ECF No. 11.)

JOSE GUADALUPE CALDERON,

 Plaintiff,

v.

MAGDY DANIALS, et.al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:19-cv-01734-DAD-SAB (PC)

ORDER VACATING JANUARY 9, 2020 

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, 

AND GRANTING PLAINTIFF ONE FINAL 

OPPORTUNITY TO FILE A SECOND 

AMENDED COMPLAINT

[ECF Nos. 9, 12, 14]

Case 1:19-cv-01734-DAD-SAB Document 15 Filed 01/28/20 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

On January 23, 2020 and January 24, 2020, Plaintiff filed two notices regarding the allegations 

in the first amended complaint. (ECF Nos. 12, 14.) Plaintiff contends that the Court misconstrued and 

omitted certain factual allegations from the analysis. (Id.) In the interest of justice and in an abundance 

of caution, the Court will vacate the January 9, 2020 Findings and Recommendations and grant Plaintiff 

one final opportunity to amend by filing a second amended complaint. If Plaintiff truly believes that 

certain facts were misconstrued or omitted, Plaintiff should clearly and concisely set forth all of his 

factual allegations in a second amended complaint, and Plaintiff is advised that that an amended 

complaint supersedes the prior complaint. Lacey v. Maricopa Cnty., 693 F.3d 896, 927 (9th Cir. 2012). 

Therefore, Plaintiff’s second amended complaint must be “complete in itself without reference to the 

prior or superseded pleading.” Local Rule 220.

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The January 9, 2020 Findings and Recommendations (ECF No. 9) are VACATED; 

2. Within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order Plaintiff may file a second 

amended complaint; and

3. The failure to file a second amended complaint will result in a recommendation that the 

action be dismissed for failure to state a cognizable claim for relief. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 28, 2020 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:19-cv-01734-DAD-SAB Document 15 Filed 01/28/20 Page 2 of 2