Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_20-cv-02072/USCOURTS-caed-2_20-cv-02072-2/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 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

MORIANO MILLARE, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

M. STARR, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:20-cv-2072 KJM AC P 

ORDER 

 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, seeks relief under 42 

U.S.C. § 1983. The action was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§ 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 

 On December 21, 2021, the court screened the complaint and determined that some of the 

claims were cognizable, while others were not. ECF No. 10. Plaintiff was directed to inform the 

court whether he wished to proceed on the cognizable claims only, or to amend the complaint. Id. 

at 9-11. He was provided with a form with which to do so. Id. On January 3, 2022, plaintiff 

returned a document of his own crafting which details plaintiff’s intentions regarding each claim. 

ECF No. 13. It is apparent that plaintiff wishes to amend his complaint rather than voluntarily 

dismiss any claims. Accordingly, the court will set a deadline for the filing of an amended 

complaint. 

//// 

Case 2:20-cv-02072-DAD-AC Document 14 Filed 01/28/22 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 

 Plaintiff is referred to the screening order, ECF No. 10, for guidance regarding the 

deficiencies of his original complaint and what must be alleged to successfully state a claim for 

relief. Plaintiff is further reminded that an amended complaint must be a document that is 

complete in and unto itself and contain all the claims that he wishes to raise. See Local Rule 220. 

The claims in the original complaint may not be incorporated by reference into the amended 

complaint because an amended complaint supersedes the original complaint. See Rhodes v. 

Robinson, 621 F.3d 1002, 1005 (9th Cir. 2010); see also Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1262 

(9th Cir. 1992). Finally, an amended complaint may not change the nature of the suit by alleging 

new, unrelated claims. See George v. Smith, 507 F.3d 605, 607 (7th Cir. 2007). 

 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that a First Amended Complaint shall be filed 

within thirty days of the date of this order. 

DATED: January 27, 2022 

Case 2:20-cv-02072-DAD-AC Document 14 Filed 01/28/22 Page 2 of 2