Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_17-cv-01056/USCOURTS-caed-2_17-cv-01056-14/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

TOM M. FRANKS,

Plaintiff,

v.

J. CLARK KELSO, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:17-cv-1056 KJM CKD P

ORDER

Plaintiff is a California prisoner proceeding se. On March 27, 2020, plaintiff filed a 

motion for leave to amend and a proposed amended complaint. In the amended complaint 

plaintiff requests to add defendant Steven Paul who was screened out when plaintiff’s original 

complaint was screened in 2017.1 Plaintiff does not add anything material to the claim against 

defendant Paul and does not explain his two-and-a-half-year delay in seeking leave to amend.

See Johnson v. Buckley, 356 F.3d 1067, 1077 (9th Cir. 2004) (among other things, the court 

considers futility of amendment and undue delay in considering whether to grant leave to amend). 

Further, the amended complaint is an incomplete supplemental pleading which is not permitted 

under Local Rule 220.

1 The undersigned issued Findings and Recommendations on October 18, 2017, screening out a 

claim and several defendants including Steven Paul. (ECF No. 7). Plaintiff failed to file any 

objections to the Findings and Recommendations and the district judge assigned to the case at that 

time adopted them in full on November 14, 2017 (ECF No. 13). 

Case 2:17-cv-01056-KJM-CKD Document 74 Filed 03/31/20 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’s motion for leave to amend will be denied and the proposed amended complaint 

stricken. Plaintiff is warned that the court views plaintiff’s motion as frivolous especially at this 

stage in plaintiff’s case.

2

 If plaintiff files other frivolous motions, or motions made in bad faith, 

sanctions, including dismissal of this action, may issue.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file an amended complaint (ECF No. 71) is denied; and

2. Plaintiff’s amended complaint (ECF No. 72) is stricken. 

Dated: March 31, 2020

1

fran1056.mta

2 The defendants have already filed a motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 50), and Findings 

and Recommendations partially granting and partially denying their motion is pending. (ECF No. 

64). 

_____________________________________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Case 2:17-cv-01056-KJM-CKD Document 74 Filed 03/31/20 Page 2 of 2