Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00633/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00633-1/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

27

28

1

STIPULATION TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT (1:15-cv-00633 LJO BAM)

KAMALA D. HARRIS, State Bar No. 146672

Attorney General of California

MONICA N. ANDERSON, State Bar No. 182970

Supervising Deputy Attorney General

R. LAWRENCE BRAGG, State Bar No. 119194

Deputy Attorney General

1300 I Street, Suite 125

P.O. Box 944255

Sacramento, CA 94244-2550

Telephone: (916) 445-2595

Fax: (916) 324-5205

E-mail: Lawrence.Bragg@doj.ca.gov

Attorneys for Defendants

Lowery and Ladd

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FRESNO DIVISION

JAMES MOZINGO,

Plaintiff,

v.

RAYTHEL FISHER, JR., et al.,

Defendants.

1:15-cv-00633 LJO BAM

STIPULATION TO STRIKE PORTIONS 

OF FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT; 

ORDER REQUIRING FILING OF 

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 

REFLECTING STIPULATED CHANGES

After meeting and conferring, it is stipulated by and between Plaintiff Mozingo and 

Defendants Lowery and Ladd that certain allegations are stricken from the First Amended 

Complaint For Damages for Willful Violations of Civil Rights and for Pendent State Claims 

(FAC) (ECF No. 12):

1. The words “right to due process” at FAC 1:24-25; and

///

///

Case 1:15-cv-00633-LJO-BAM Document 14 Filed 09/11/15 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

STIPULATION TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT (1:15-cv-00633 LJO BAM)

2. The words “under 42 U.S.C. § 1985 and 42 U.S.C. § 1986 (conspiracy to deprive 

civil rights)” at FAC 1:24-26. This language is stricken without prejudice to Mozingo re-alleging 

a violation of 42 U.S.C. sections 1985 and 1986 after conducting discovery. Defendants Lowery 

and Ladd agree that re-alleging a violation of 42 U.S.C. sections 1985 and 1986 is not subject to 

defenses based on the timeliness of the filing.

SO STIPULATED. 

Dated: September 8, 2015 Respectfully submitted,

LAW OFFICE OF KEN I. KARAN

/S/ KEN I. KARAN 

KEN I. KARAN

Attorney for Plaintiff Mozingo

KAMALA D. HARRIS

Attorney General of California

MONICA N. ANDERSON

Supervising Deputy Attorney General

/s/ R. Lawrence Bragg

R. LAWRENCE BRAGG

Deputy Attorney General

Attorneys for Defendants

Lowery and Ladd

ORDER

The above stipulation is granted, on the condition that Plaintiff file a Second Amended 

Complaint that reflects the stipulated changes. This will help to ensure a clear record. This order 

shall constitute leave to file a Second Amended Complaint for the above-mentioned purpose only. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 10, 2015 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-00633-LJO-BAM Document 14 Filed 09/11/15 Page 2 of 2