Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-01592/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-01592-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act

---

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MAURICE HUNT,

Plaintiff,

v.

A. MATEVOUSIAN, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:15-cv-01457-DAD-SAB-PC

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S 

MOTION TO CORRECT THE DOCKET

AND DIRECTING THE CLERK OF THE 

COURT TO FILE THE MARCH 25, 2016 

COMPLAINT AND APPLICATION TO 

PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS AS A 

NEW ACTION

(ECF NO. 32)

Plaintiff is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis pursuant to Bivens 

v. Six Unknown Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). This matter was referred to a United States 

Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. Pending before the 

Court is Plaintiff’s motion requesting the Clerk to correct the docket in this case, filed on August 

26, 2016. (ECF No. 32.)

On January 27, 2016, an order was entered, dismissing the first amended complaint and 

granting Plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint. (ECF No. 14.)1 On March 25, 2016, a 

second amended complaint was docketed in this action. (ECF No. 24.) On August 26, 2016, 

Plaintiff filed the motion that is before the Court. (ECF No. 32.) In his motion, Plaintiff states

that the Clerk of the Court erroneously filed a “separate and distinct complaint” as a second 

 

1 On March 16, 2016, Plaintiff filed an appeal of the January 27, 2016, order dismissing the complaint. On May 18, 

2016, an order was entered, dismissing the appeal. On July 13, 2016, the mandate was filed in this Court. (ECF No. 

31.)

Case 1:16-cv-01592-AWI-BAM Document 1 Filed 10/21/16 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

amended complaint in this action. Plaintiff seeks a correction to the docket to indicate that the 

second amended complaint was a “separate and distinct complaint.” 

A second amended complaint and motion to proceed in forma pauperis were filed in this 

action on March 25, 2016. A review of the March 25, 2016, second amended complaint 

indicates that although it names the Defendants in this case, the facts and claims alleged are 

different than the allegations in this case. Here, Plaintiff alleges that Defendants deprived him of 

his medical assistive device (wheelchair) in violation of the Eight Amendment. The document 

which was filed as a second amended complaint in this action is complaining of the denial of 

access to legal resources. 

It appears upon review of the March 25, 2016 complaint, that it was not intended to be a 

second amended complaint in this action, but that Plaintiff was attempting file a separate action

alleging new violations of his federal rights. Accordingly, the complaint filed on March 25, 

2016 shall be disregarded and the Court shall direct the Clerk of the Court to file Plaintiff’s 

March 25, 2016 complaint and application to proceed in forma pauperis as a new action. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The second amended complaint filed March 25, 2016 in this action is 

DISREGARDED; and 

2. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to file the complaint and motion to proceed 

in forma pauperis that were filed in this action on March 25, 2016 (ECF Nos. 23, 

24) as a new action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 21, 2016 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:16-cv-01592-AWI-BAM Document 1 Filed 10/21/16 Page 2 of 2