Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01178/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01178-3/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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DAVID ESTRADA,

Plaintiff,

v.

M. JENNINGS, et al.,

Defendant.

Case No. 1:15-cv-01178 BAM PC

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S 

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AN 

AMENDED COMPLAINT

(ECF No. 11)

ORDER DENYING PLAINITFF’S MOTION 

FOR RECONSIDERATION

(ECF NO. 12)

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 

§ 1983. 

On July 29, 2015, the Court received for filing a complaint submitted electronically. 

Plaintiff, an inmate in the custody of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation 

(CDCR) at CSP Corcoran, brings this lawsuit against defendant correctional officials employed 

by the CDCR at CSP Corcoran. Plaintiff is alleging that Defendants have improperly classified 

him as a sex offender based upon incorrect information in his California Youth Authority (CYA) 

file.

Plaintiff sought an order sealing the complaint. On July 30, 2015, an order was entered, 

denying Plaintiff’s motion on the ground that there was no mention of his CYA file in the 

complaint, and Plaintiff had not shown good cause for the Court to prohibit mere 

Case 1:15-cv-01178-BAM Document 15 Filed 08/26/15 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

acknowledgement in this case that Plaintiff has a CYA juvenile file. 

On August 20, 2015, Plaintiff filed a motion for leave to file an amended complaint. In 

his motion, Plaintiff indicates that only seven pages of the original complaint he submitted was 

scanned and filed. Plaintiff submitted a proposed amended complaint that was lodged with the 

Court. On the same date, Plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration of the order denying his 

motion to seal the complaint. In his motion, Plaintiff indicates that he has “incorporated by 

reference” his CYA file in the amended complaint. Plaintiff has not submitted his CYA file 

along with the complaint. 

The Court has reviewed Plaintiff’s August 20, 2015, amended complaint lodged with the 

Court. Plaintiff does refer generally to his CYA file in the amended complaint, but does not 

attach any part of his CYA file to the amended complaint, or refer to any specific information in 

his CYA file. Plaintiff refers generally to the nature of his underlying criminal history, but does 

not refer to any specific factual information. For the same reasons noted in the July 30, 2015, 

order, the Court finds no compelling reason to seal the complaint. (Doc. 6.) The motion for 

reconsideration should therefore be denied.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file an amended complaint is granted. The Clerk’s 

Office shall file the amended complaint lodged with the Court on August 20, 2015.

2. Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration of the order denying Plaintiff’s motion to seal 

the complaint is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 25, 2015 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-01178-BAM Document 15 Filed 08/26/15 Page 2 of 2