Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01790/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01790-1/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

NICHOLAS PATRICK,

Plaintiff,

v.

REYES, et al.,

Defendants.

_____________________________________/

Case No. 1:15-cv-01790-SKO (PC)

ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT AND 

AMENDED COMPLAINT, WITH LEAVE 

TO FILE SECOND AMENDED 

COMPLAINT, AND DENYING MOTION 

AS MOOT

(Docs. 1, 14, and 15)

Plaintiff Nicholas Patrick (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on November 10, 2015. On 

December 21, 2015, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting to substitute Officer Reynaga for nameddefendant Officer Reyes based on a misidentification, and to add six new defendants. 

Concurrently, Plaintiff filed an amended complaint setting forth claims against the new 

defendants.

An amended complaint must be complete within itself, without reference to prior 

pleadings. Local Rule 220; Lacey v. Maricopa County, 693 F.3d 896, 907 n.1 (9th Cir. 2012) (en 

banc). Therefore, Plaintiff may not proceed on claims set forth in both his original and his 

amended complaints. The Court will dismiss both complaints and Plaintiff shall file a second 

amended complaint that contains all of his claims against all of the defendants he seeks to sue in 

this action. Regarding Plaintiff’s explanation that he ran out of room on the form complaint, he 

may attach additional pages to the form as necessary to make his second amended complaint 

Case 1:15-cv-01790-LJO-MJS Document 17 Filed 01/06/16 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

complete. Plaintiff may also correct the misidentification of Officer Reyes by naming Officer 

Reynaga in his second amended complaint.

Based on the foregoing, the Court HEREBY ORDERS as follows:

1. Plaintiff’s original and amended complaints are dismissed because neither is 

complete within itself without reference to the other;

2. The Clerk’s Office shall send Plaintiff a complaint form;

3. Within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall file a 

second amended complaint that is complete within itself and sets forth all of his 

claims against all of the parties he seeks to sue in this action;

4. Plaintiff’s motion to substitute Officer Reynaga for Officer Reyes and to add six 

new defendants, filed on December 21, 2015, is DENIED as moot in light of this 

order; and

5. The failure to comply with this order will result in the dismissal of this action, 

without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 5, 2016 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-01790-LJO-MJS Document 17 Filed 01/06/16 Page 2 of 2