Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-01485/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-01485-1/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

 This action is referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1

§ 636(b)(1)(B), Local General Order No. 262, and E.D. Cal. L.R. (“Local Rule”) 302.

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RON WALLS,

Plaintiff, No. 2:09-cv-1485 KJN P

vs.

B.C. ADAMS, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel and in forma pauperis in

this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action was reassigned to the

undersigned on February 9, 2010.1

On November 2, 2009, the court granted plaintiff’s application to proceed in

forma pauperis, but dismissed plaintiff’s Amended Complaint with leave to file a Second

Amended Complaint within thirty days. Dkt. No. 10. On December 1, 2009, plaintiff filed two

documents, a Motion for Leave to file a Second Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 12), and a

Proposed Second Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 13 (entitled “Amended Complaint”)). For the

following reasons, the court denies plaintiff’s Motion, strikes his Proposed Second Amended

Case 2:09-cv-01485-KJN Document 15 Filed 04/02/10 Page 1 of 3
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

 Local Rule 220 (Local Rules of Practice for the United States District Court, Eastern 2

District of California) provides that, absent prior approval of the court, “every pleading to which

an amendment or supplement is permitted as a matter of right or has been allowed by court order

shall be retyped and filed so that it is complete in itself without reference to the prior or

superseded pleading. . . . All changed pleadings shall contain copies of all exhibits referred to in

the changed pleading. ” Local Rule 220(a). Since an amended complaint supersedes a prior

complaint, Loux v. Rhay, 375 F.2d 55, 57 (9th Cir. 1967), “a plaintiff waives all causes of action

alleged in the original complaint which are not alleged in the amended complaint,” London v.

Coopers & Lybrand, 644 F.2d 811, 814 (9th Cir.1981), and defendants not named in an amended

complaint are no longer defendants, Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1262 (9th Cir.1992). 

 Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a) requires that a complaint include: (1) the grounds upon which the 3

court’s jurisdiction rests; (2) a short and plain statement of each claim showing entitlement to

relief; and (3) a demand for relief. 

2

Complaint, and again accords plaintiff thirty (30) days within which to file a Second Amended

Complaint that conforms to standard pleading requirements and meets the concerns set forth in

the court’s prior order.

Plaintiff’s Proposed Second Amended Complaint consists of a cursorily

completed form and references an attachment that was not included. Dkt. No. 13. While it is

reasonable to infer that the referenced attachment is plaintiff’s separately filed Motion for Leave

to file a Second Amended Complaint, including its lengthy statement of facts and the supporting

exhibits attached thereto, these documents cannot properly be read together to form an acceptable

complaint. Not only is plaintiff required to consolidate all relevant statements and documents in

one pleading, but even if these documents were read together the result would fail to comply 2

with fundamental pleading rules, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 8.3

While plaintiff’s Amended Complaint filed September 28, 2009 (Dkt. No. 7)

conformed to the pleading requirements of this court and the Federal Rules, it was dismissed for

the substantive reasons set forth in the court’s order filed November 2, 2009 (Dkt. No. 9). 

Plaintiff will be accorded one additional opportunity to file a Second Amended Complaint that

meets both substantive and pleading requirements. The “Statement of Fact” set forth in

Plaintiff’s Motion (Dkt. No. 12) should be incorporated in the new pleading, as well as any other

Case 2:09-cv-01485-KJN Document 15 Filed 04/02/10 Page 2 of 3
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

 While the court recognizes that plaintiff obtained assistance in preparing and typing this

4

Statement, a subsequently filed pleading need not be typed – plaintiff’s handwriting is

sufficiently legible for the court’s review.

3

facts that link each named defendant with conduct which plaintiff challenges. Plaintiff may 4

again verify the truth of his allegations. In addition, plaintiff should attach all pertinent exhibits

to his Second Amended Complaint.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to file a Second Amended Complaint (Dkt. No.

12), is denied;

2. The “Second Amended Complaint” filed December 1, 2009 (Dkt. No. 13) is

stricken;

3. Pursuant to the court’s order filed November 2, 2009 (Dkt. No. 9), plaintiff

may file a Second Amended Complaint within thirty (30) days of the filing date of this order;

4. Failure timely to file a Second Amended Complaint will result in a

recommendation that this case be dismissed.

5. The Clerk of Court is directed to send plaintiff one copy each of the following

documents: (a) plaintiff’s Amended Complaint filed September 28, 2009 (Dkt. No. 7); (b) this

court’s order filed November 2, 2009 (Dkt. No. 9); and (c) plaintiff’s Motion filed December 1,

2009 and attached exhibits (Dkt. No. 12).

SO ORDERED. 

DATED: April 1, 2010

_____________________________________

KENDALL J. NEWMAN

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

wall1485.SAC.amd

Case 2:09-cv-01485-KJN Document 15 Filed 04/02/10 Page 3 of 3