Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00557/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00557-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 28:1983 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

ORLANDO MARTIN,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-05-0557 DFL JFM P

vs.

ALVARO C. TRAQUINA, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

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

rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On September 27, 2005, defendants filed a motion to

dismiss this action. On November 1, 2005, plaintiff filed a motion for leave to amend his

complaint, together with a document styled “Amended Complaint.” Defendants have filed a

statement of non-opposition to plaintiff’s motion. Good cause appearing, plaintiff’s motion will

be granted. Defendants’ motion to dismiss, which is directed to allegations of the original

complaint, will be denied as mooted by the amendment of plaintiff’s complaint.

Local Rule 15-220 requires that an amended complaint be complete in itself

without reference to any prior pleading. This is because, as a general rule, an amended complaint

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

in any amended complaint the involvement of each defendant must be sufficiently alleged. 

Case 2:05-cv-00557-ALA Document 24 Filed 12/21/05 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

2

The document styled by plaintiff as an amended complaint is not in fact complete

in itself without reference to prior pleadings. Instead, plaintiff seeks to dismiss three defendants

from this action and to delete all references to said defendants from the original complaint. In

accordance with Local Rule 15-220, the court will require plaintiff to file a second amended

complaint that is complete in itself.

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s November 1, 2005 motion to amend is granted.

2. Plaintiff's complaint and the document filed November 1, 2005 and styled

“amended complaint” are dismissed.

3. Plaintiff is granted thirty days from the date of service of this order to file and

serve a second amended complaint that complies with the requirements of the Civil Rights Act,

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the Local Rules of Practice; the second amended

complaint must bear the docket number assigned this case and must be labeled “Second

Amended Complaint”; plaintiff must file an original and two copies of the second amended

complaint; failure to file a second amended complaint in accordance with this order will result in

a recommendation that this action be dismissed.

4. Defendants’ September 27, 2005 motion to dismiss is denied.

5. Defendants shall file and serve a response to plaintiff’s second amended

complaint within twenty days after service thereof. 

DATED: December 21, 2005. 

12

mart0557.amd 

Case 2:05-cv-00557-ALA Document 24 Filed 12/21/05 Page 2 of 2