Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_09-cv-01882/USCOURTS-azd-2_09-cv-01882-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Other 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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Bobbie Glen Cole Scott, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

State of Arizona; United States of

America, 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 09-1882-PHX-JAT (Lead)

CV 09-1883-PHX-JAT (Cons)

CV 09-1884-PHX-JAT (Cons)

CV 09-1885-PHX-JAT (Cons)

ORDER

Consistent with this Court’s prior order, Plaintiff has re-filed his request to proceed

in forma pauperis. Also pending are Plaintiff’s two motions to amend the Complaint. The

Court will address the motions to amend the Complaint first.

Because Plaintiff has not amended his Complaint once as permitted by Federal Rule

of Civil Procedure 15, the Court will grant leave to amend. However, Plaintiff is cautioned

that any amendment completely supersedes his previous Complaint. See Dowdy v. Raman,

2008 WL 1901330, *3 (E.D. Cal. 2008). Plaintiff has not lodged a proposed amended

complaint. Therefore, Plaintiff will be given 30 days from the date of this Order to file a first

amended complaint that contains all claims against all defendants that he wishes to raise in

these four consolidated actions. In other words, the first amended complaint must cover, in

a signal document, all issues for all four consolidated cases.

Case 2:09-cv-01882-JAT Document 15 Filed 09/30/09 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 -

Additionally, Plaintiff is cautioned that federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction.

Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 377 (1994). The Court notes that

Plaintiff has voluntarily dismissed the United States as a Defendant in this case. Doc. #9.

Thus, in filing the amended complaint, Plaintiff must state a basis for this Court’s jurisdiction

over his claims against the State of Arizona, or this case will be dismissed, without prejudice,

for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction.

Based on the foregoing,

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motions to proceed in forma pauperis at Docs. ##10,

11, and 12 are denied because the Court needs only one motion to proceed in forma pauperis

for this case. Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis at Doc. #8 remains pending

subject to this Court screening the to-be-filed amended complaint under 28 U.S.C. §

1915(e)(2).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motions to amend the complaint (Docs.

## 13 and 14) are granted to the limited extent that Plaintiff shall file one document

containing the entire first amended complaint within 30 days of the date of this Order.

DATED this 30th day of September, 2009.

Case 2:09-cv-01882-JAT Document 15 Filed 09/30/09 Page 2 of 2