Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00791/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00791-3/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

RONALD L. ADAMS, )

)

 )

Plaintiff, )

 )

 v. )

 )

DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS, et al., )

 )

 )

Defendants. )

____________________________________)

1:07-cv-00791-AWI-GSA-PC 

 

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO

AMEND COMPLAINT

(Doc. 16)

THIRTY DAY DEADLINE TO FILE

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

ORDER FOR CLERK TO SEND

COMPLAINT FORM TO PLAINTIFF

Ronald L. Adams ("plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this

civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Now pending is plaintiff's motion to amend his

complaint, filed on October 29, 2007.

Under Rule 15(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a party may amend the party’s

pleading once as a matter of course at any time before a responsive pleading is served. Otherwise, a

party may amend only by leave of the court or by written consent of the adverse party, and leave shall

be freely given when justice so requires. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a). Plaintiff filed the original complaint on

July 27, 2006. On September 11, 2006, plaintiff filed an amended complaint ("First Amended

Complaint"). Because plaintiff has already amended the complaint once, plaintiff's pending motion to

amend must be granted by the court before he can file a Second Amended Complaint.

Case 1:07-cv-00791-AWI -GSA Document 17 Filed 10/31/07 Page 1 of 3
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

“Rule 15(a) is very liberal and leave to amend ‘shall be freely given when justice so requires.’”

AmerisourceBergen Corp. v. Dialysis West, Inc., 445 F.3d 1132, 1136 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Fed. R.

Civ. P. 15(a)). However, courts “need not grant leave to amend where the amendment: (1) prejudices

the opposing party; (2) is sought in bad faith; (3) produces an undue delay in the litigation; or (4) is

futile.” Id. The factor of “‘[u]ndue delay by itself . . . is insufficient to justify denying a motion to

amend.’” Owens v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc., 244 F.3d 708, 712,13 (9th Cir. 2001) (quoting

Bowles v. Reade, 198 F.3d 752, 757-58 (9th Cir. 1999)). 

Here, plaintiff's case has been pending for fifteen months, since July 27, 2006. The delay in

litigation will be further extended if plaintiff is given leave to amend. However, given that the complaint

has not been served, and no other party has appeared in the action, amending the complaint will not

prejudice the opposing party. Plaintiff seeks leave to amend in order to correct errors in the First

Amended Complaint, add a defendant who was omitted in error, and clarify his claims. Good faith

appearing, the court finds that in the interest of justice, plaintiff's motion to amend the complaint shall

be granted.

Plaintiff is informed he must demonstrate in his amended complaint how the conditions

complained of have resulted in a deprivation of plaintiff’s constitutional rights. See Ellis v. Cassidy, 625

F.2d 227 (9th Cir. 1980). The complaint must allege in specific terms how each named defendant is

involved. There can be no liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 unless there is some affirmative link or

connection between a defendant’s actions and the claimed deprivation. Rizzo v. Goode, 423 U.S. 362

(1976); May v. Enomoto, 633 F.2d 164, 167 (9th Cir. 1980); Johnson v. Duffy, 588 F.2d 740, 743 (9th

Cir. 1978). 

Plaintiff should note that although he has been given the opportunity to amend, it is not for the

purposes of adding new defendants relating to issues arising after July 27, 2006. In addition, plaintiff

should take care to include only those claims that have been exhausted prior to the initiation of this suit

on July 27, 2006.

Finally, plaintiff is advised that Local Rule 15-220 requires that an amended complaint be

complete in itself without reference to any prior pleading. As a general rule, an amended complaint

Case 1:07-cv-00791-AWI -GSA Document 17 Filed 10/31/07 Page 2 of 3
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 3

supersedes the original complaint. See Loux v. Rhay, 375 F.2d 55, 57 (9th Cir. 1967). Once an

amended complaint is filed, the original complaint no longer serves any function in the case. Therefore,

in an amended complaint, as in an original complaint, each claim and the involvement of each defendant

must be sufficiently alleged. The Second Amended Complaint should be clearly and boldly titled

“SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT,” refer to the appropriate case number, and be an original signed

under penalty of perjury. 

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's motion to amend the complaint is GRANTED;

2. Within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order, plaintiff shall file a Second

Amended Complaint demonstrating proper grounds for relief ;

3. The Clerk of the Court shall send one civil rights complaint form to plaintiff; and

4. Plaintiff is warned that the failure to comply with this order will result in a

recommendation that this action be dismissed for failure to obey a court order.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: October 30, 2007 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

60kij8 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:07-cv-00791-AWI -GSA Document 17 Filed 10/31/07 Page 3 of 3