Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-00809/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-00809-19/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANTHONY NGUYEN,

Plaintiff,

v.

M. D. BITER, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:11-cv-00809-AWI-SKO PC 

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO

FILE SUPPLEMENTAL COMPLAINT IN THE

FUTURE, AUTHORIZING SERVICE OF

ORIGINAL COMPLAINT, AND

FORWARDING SERVICE DOCUMENTS TO

PLAINTIFF FOR COMPLETION AND

RETURN WITHIN THIRTY DAYS

(Docs. 1, 2, 37, and 64) 

Plaintiff AnthonyNguyen, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this

civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on May 18, 2011. The Court screened Plaintiff’s

original complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and found that it stated an Eighth Amendment

claim against Defendant Biter. Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a); Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678, 129 S.Ct.

1

1937, 1949 (2009); Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 1964-65

(2007). Plaintiff subsequently amended once as a matter of right and on August 6, 2012, in response

to the Court’s second screening order requiring him to either file a second amended complaint or

notify the Court of his willingness to proceed on his original complaint, Plaintiff elected to proceed

on his original complaint. In addition, Plaintiff requested leave to file a supplemental complaint in

the future.

On October 31, 2011, the Honorable Anthony W. Ishii dismissed Defendants Adams, Tarnoff, Pool, and

1

Foston from this action based on Plaintiff’s failure to state a claim against them. (Doc. 37.)

1

Case 1:11-cv-00809-AWI-SKO Document 66 Filed 09/12/12 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

27

28

Plaintiff is not precluded from filing a motion seeking leave to file a supplemental complaint

in the future, accompanied by a proposed supplemental complaint. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(d). However,

Plaintiff may not obtain leave at this juncture to file, at some unknown future date, a supplemental

pleading setting forth unknown claims. Leave to file a supplemental complaint will be granted only

if Plaintiff makes the requisite showing under Rule 15(d). Further, Plaintiff has already been

informed that he will not be permitted to amend to add unrelated claims against unrelated parties. 

(Docs. 58, 63.) 

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file a supplemental complaint in the future is denied,

without prejudice;

2. Service shall be initiated on the following defendant:

WARDEN M. D. BITER

3. The Clerk of the Court shall send Plaintiff one (1) USM-285 form, one (1) summons,

a Notice of Submission of Documents form, an instruction sheet and a copy of the

complaint filed on May 18, 2011.

4. Within thirty (30) days from the date of this order, Plaintiff shall complete the

attached Notice of Submission of Documents and submit the completed Notice to the

Court with the following documents:

a. One completed summons;

b. One completed USM-285 form; and 

c. Two (2) copies of the endorsed complaint filed May 18, 2011 (court

documents 1 and 2). 

5. Plaintiff need not attempt service on the defendant and need not request waiver of

service. Upon receipt of the above-described documents, the Court will direct the

United States Marshal to serve the above-named defendant pursuant to Federal Rule

of Civil Procedure 4 without payment of costs. 

///

///

2

Case 1:11-cv-00809-AWI-SKO Document 66 Filed 09/12/12 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

27

28

6. The failure to comply with this order will result in dismissal of this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 11, 2012 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto 

ie14hj UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

3

Case 1:11-cv-00809-AWI-SKO Document 66 Filed 09/12/12 Page 3 of 3