Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_21-cv-00392/USCOURTS-caed-1_21-cv-00392-0/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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LUIS MANUEL GARCES,

Plaintiff,

v.

M. GAMBOA, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:21-cv-00392-EPG (PC)

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR LEAVE 

TO AMEND COMPLAINT

(ECF. No. 9)

Plaintiff Luis Manuel Garces (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in 

forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff commenced this 

action by filing a complaint on March 12, 2021. (ECF No. 1.) On March 23, 2021, Plaintiff filed a 

motion for leave to file an amended complaint. (ECF No. 9.) 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(1) provides: “A party may amend its pleading once 

as a matter of course within: (A) 21 days after serving it, or (B) if the pleading is one to which a 

responsive pleading is required, 21 days after service of a responsive pleading or 21 days after 

service of a motion under Rule 12(b), (e), or (f), whichever is earlier.”

Here, the complaint has not been served nor has a responsive pleading been served. In 

addition, Plaintiff has not previously amended his complaint. Thus, Plaintiff may file an amended 

complaint once as a matter of course. 

///

Case 1:21-cv-00392-JLT-EPG Document 10 Filed 03/24/21 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

The amended complaint should be clearly and boldly titled “First Amended Complaint,” 

refer to the appropriate case number, and be an original signed under penalty of perjury. Plaintiff 

should note that although he has the opportunity to amend, it is not for the purpose of changing 

the nature of this suit or adding unrelated claims. George v. Smith, 507 F.3d 605, 607 (7th Cir. 

2007) (no “buckshot” complaints). Plaintiff is also advised that an amended complaint supersedes 

the original complaint, Lacey v. Maricopa County, 693 F.3d. 896, 907 n.1 (9th Cir. 2012) (en 

banc), and must be complete in itself without reference to the prior or superseded pleading, Local 

Rule 220. Therefore, in an amended complaint, as in an original complaint, each claim must be 

sufficiently alleged. The amended complaint must also state what each named defendant did that 

led to the deprivation of Plaintiff’s constitutional or other federal rights. Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a); 

Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009); Jones v. Williams, 297 F.3d 930, 934 (9th Cir. 2002). 

Plaintiff must demonstrate that each defendant personally participated in the deprivation of his 

rights. Jones, 297 F.3d at 934 (emphasis added). 

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file an amended complaint (ECF No. 9) is 

GRANTED. Plaintiff may file an amended complaint within thirty (30) days after service of this 

order. If Plaintiff fails to file an amended complaint within the thirty-day period, the Court will 

screen the original complaint in due course as required by 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915 and 1915A. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 24, 2021 /s/

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:21-cv-00392-JLT-EPG Document 10 Filed 03/24/21 Page 2 of 2