Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-00239/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-00239-4/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

NICHOLAS PATRICK,

 Plaintiff,

v.

REYNAGA, et al.,

 Defendants.

Case No. 1:16-cv-00239-LJO-MJS (PC)

ORDER DISMISSING FIRST AMENDED 

COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND

(ECF No. 14)

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO 

DISMISS WITH LEAVE TO AMEND 

(ECF No. 22)

ORDER DENYING MOTION 

REQUESTING INVESTIGATION

(ECF No. 19)

ORDER DENYING MOTION AS TO 

EVIDENCE

(ECF No. 21)

THIRTY (30) DAY DEADLINE TO FILE 

AMENDED COMPLAINT

I. Procedural History

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

rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The Court dismissed Plaintiff’s 

complaint for failure to state a claim, but gave leave to amend. (ECF No. 12.) His first 

Case 1:16-cv-00239-LJO-JDP Document 26 Filed 11/21/16 Page 1 of 4
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

amended complaint, filed June 15, 2016, is before the Court for screening. (ECF No. 

14.)

On August 12, 2016, Plaintiff filed a “Motion Requesting Investigation.” (ECF No. 

19.) Therein, he sought to add additional facts to his complaint and asked the Court to 

join additional defendants. He also asked the Court to investigate the defendants.

On September 6, 2016, Plaintiff lodged a proposed amended complaint. (ECF 

No. 20.)

On September 21, 2016, Plaintiff filed a “Motion as to Evidence,” seeking to 

submit evidence in support of his complaint. (ECF No. 21.)

On October 3, 2016, Plaintiff filed a motion seeking to dismiss his complaint with 

leave to amend so that he could include all of his claims in a single complaint. (ECF No. 

22.)

II. Motion to Dismiss with Leave to Amend

An amended complaint must be complete within itself, without reference to other

pleadings. Local Rule 220; Lacey v. Maricopa County, 693 F.3d 896, 907 n.1 (9th Cir. 

2012) (en banc). Therefore, Plaintiff may not proceed on discrete claims set forth in his 

various amended complaints and motions. The Court will grant Plaintiff’s motion to 

dismiss with leave to amend. Plaintiff’s first amended complaint will be dismissed. His 

lodged amended complaint will not be filed. Plaintiff will be given leave to file a second 

amended complaint that contains all of his claims against all of the defendants he seeks 

to sue in this action.

Plaintiff is reminded that Plaintiff may not bring unrelated claims against 

unrelated parties in a single action. Fed. R. Civ. P. 18(a), 20(a)(2); Owens v. Hinsley, 

653 F.3d 950, 952 (7th Cir. 2011); George v. Smith, 507 F.3d 605, 607 (7th Cir. 2007). 

Plaintiff may bring a claim against multiple defendants so long as (1) the claim arises 

out of the same transaction or occurrence, or series of transactions and occurrences, 

and (2) there are common questions of law or fact. Fed. R. Civ. P. 20(a)(2); Coughlin v. 

Rogers, 130 F.3d 1348, 1351 (9th Cir. 1997); Desert Empire Bank v. Insurance Co. of 

Case 1:16-cv-00239-LJO-JDP Document 26 Filed 11/21/16 Page 2 of 4
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

3

North America, 623 F.2d 1371, 1375 (9th Cir. 1980). Only if the defendants are properly 

joined under Rule 20(a) will the Court review the claims to determine if they may be 

joined under Rule 18(a), which permits the joinder of multiple claims against the same 

party.

III. Motion Requesting Investigation

Plaintiff’s request for the Court to investigate Defendants is outside the scope of 

this litigation and will be denied.

IV. Motion as to Evidence

At the pleading stage, the Court must accept Plaintiff’s allegations as true. 

Plaintiff is not required to submit evidence in support of his contentions. Indeed, parties 

may not file evidence with the Court until the course of litigation brings the evidence into 

question (for example, on a motion for summary judgment, at trial, or when requested 

by the Court). Presently, Plaintiff’s complaint is pending screening, no motions for 

summary judgment are before the Court, and no trial date has been set. In this 

circumstance, the Court cannot and will not serve as a repository for Plaintiff’s evidence 

(e.g., prison or medical records, affidavits, declarations, etc.). Plaintiff’s “Motion as to

Evidence” will be denied.

V. Order

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s motion to dismiss with leave to amend (ECF No. 22) is 

GRANTED;

2. Plaintiff’s first amended complaint (ECF No. 14) is DISMISSED;

3. Within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff must 

file a second amended complaint or a notice of voluntary dismissal;

4. If Plaintiff fails to file an amended complaint or notice of voluntary 

dismissal, the undersigned will recommend this action be dismissed, with 

prejudice, for failure to comply with a court order and failure to state a 

claim.

Case 1:16-cv-00239-LJO-JDP Document 26 Filed 11/21/16 Page 3 of 4
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

4

5. Plaintiff’s Motion Requesting Investigation (ECF No. 19) is DENIED; and

6. Plaintiff’s Motion as to Evidence (ECF No. 21) is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 18, 2016 /s/Michael J. Seng 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:16-cv-00239-LJO-JDP Document 26 Filed 11/21/16 Page 4 of 4