Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01025/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01025-0/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

ROBERT MAESHACK,

Plaintiff,

v.

GREENOUGH, et. al.,

Defendants.

 /

CV F 06 1025 AWI SMS P 

ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASE NOS. CVF-06-1025 AWI SMS P AND CV-F-06-065-

AWI-SMS-P 

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO

ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSE CASE NO CVF-06-065-AWI-SMS-P. 

ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO FILE

AMENDED COMPLAINT INCORPORATING

ALL CLAIMS IN ACTIONS WITHIN THIRTY

DAYS 

 Robert Maeshack (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis

in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

On December 23, 2005, Plaintiff filed a complaint which was assigned Case No. CV-F06-065-AWI-SMS-P. This Complaint raises an Eighth Amendment claim concerning lack of

medical care for a rat-bite incurred by Plaintiff on April 24, 2004. Plaintiff also alleges a due

process claim concerning his inmate appeals concerning medical care for the rat-bite.

On August 7, 2006, Plaintiff filed the instant second complaint (assigned case no CV-F06-1025-AWI-SMS-P) naming different defendants but also concerning the lack of medical care

for the rat-bite incurred on April 24, 2004. 

On August 24, 2006, Plaintiff moved to consolidate both of his cases on the basis that the

allegations stem from the same set of facts. 

Case 1:06-cv-01025-GMS Document 6 Filed 09/13/06 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

When actions involving a common question of law or fact are pending before the court, it

may order a joint hearing or trial of any or all of the matters in issue in the actions; it may order

all the actions consolidated; and it may make such orders concerning proceedings therein as may

tend to avoid unnecessary costs or delay.” Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 42(a). Consolidation may be

ordered on motion of any party or on the court’s own motion whenever it reasonably appears that

consolidation would aid in the efficient and economic disposition of a case. See In re Air Crash

Disaster at Florida Everglades on December 29, 1972, 549 F.2d 1006 (5th Cir. 1977). The grant

or denial of a motion to consolidate rests in the trial court’s sound discretion, and is not

dependant on party approval. Investors Research Co. v. United States Dist. Ct., 877 F.2d 777

(9th Cir. 1989); Cantrell v. GAF Corp., 999 F.2d 1007, 1007, 1001 (6th Cir. 1993). In

determining whether to consolidate actions, the court weighs the interest of judicial convenience

against the potential for delay, confusion, and prejudice caused by consolidation. Southwest

Marine, Inc., v. Triple A. Mach. Shop, Inc., 720 F. Supp. 805, 807 (N.D. Cal. 1989).

The Court finds that, based on its review of both complaints, the two cases can be

consolidated. Plaintiff SHALL submit an AMENDED COMPLAINT combining all of the

allegations and defendants named in CV-F-06-1025-AWI-SMS-P and in CV-F-06-065-AWISMS-P. 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 supersedes the original complaint. See Loux v. Rhay, 375 F.2d 55, 57 (9th Cir. 1967). 

Once Plaintiff files an amended complaint, the original pleading 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. 

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Case number CV-F-06-1025-AWI-SMS-P be consolidated with CV-F-06-

065-AWI-SMS-P;

2. Within THIRTY (30) days of the date of service of this Order, Plaintiff

SHALL file an AMENDED COMPLAINT combining the allegations

made in the amended complaint CV-F-06-1025-AWI-SMS-P filed August

Case 1:06-cv-01025-GMS Document 6 Filed 09/13/06 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

7, 2006, and CV-F-06-065-AWI-SMS-P, filed on December 23, 2005;

3. Plaintiff SHALL caption the complaint “AMENDED COMPLAINT,”

reference the above case number and be an original signed under penalty

of perjury;

4. The Clerk of the Court SHALL administratively close case number CV-F06-65-AWI-SMS-P;

5. No further filings SHALL be allowed in CV-F-06-65-AWI-SMS-P; and

6. All future filings SHALL bear case number CV-F-06-1025-AWI-SMS-P.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 8, 2006 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-01025-GMS Document 6 Filed 09/13/06 Page 3 of 3