Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00187/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00187-3/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 Plaintiff titles the Amended Complaint as a “Supplemental Complaint”and raises claims and that arose 1

after he initiated this action on February 10, 2006. Plaintiff also added new Defendants relating to those new claims.

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAGI MUKATIN,

Plaintiff,

v.

CALIFORNIA DEPT. CORRECTIONS,

Defendants.

 /

CV F 06 187 LJO NEW (DLB) P

ORDER STRIKING SUPPLEMENTAL

COMPLAINT FROM RECORD (Doc. 16) 

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF TIME TO

FILE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO

SEND PLAINTIFF BLANK CIVIL RIGHTS

FORM.

 Sagi Mukatin (“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. 

Plaintiff filed the instant action on February 10 ,2006, in the Sacramento Division of the

Eastern District of California. The case was transferred and received in this Court on February

21, 2006. Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint on May 12, 2006.1

On March 19, 2007, Plaintiff filed a pleading titled “Supplemental Complaint.” Plaintiff

adds Defendants and claims to the action that arose after he initiated the instant action in an

attempt to supplement the original complaint filed on February 10, 2006. However, because the

Court maintains files electronically, it does not have the capability to attach documents

subsequently filed to other documents previously filed in the Complaint. The appropriate

manner in which to Amend a Complaint is to simply file an Amended Complaint that contains all

Case 1:06-cv-00187-NVW Document 17 Filed 03/22/07 Page 1 of 4
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

of the named Defendants, claims and facts and not make reference or incorporate by reference

other pleadings filed in the case. The Court will grant Plaintiff the opportunity to file a Second

Amended Complaint. 

The Court also wishes to inform Plaintiff of the exhaustion requirement applicable to his

case. Pursuant to the Prison Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”) of 1995, “[n]o action shall be

brought with respect to prison conditions under [42 U.S.C. § 1983], or any other Federal law, by

a prisoner confined in any jail, prison, or other correctional facility until such administrative

remedies as are available are exhausted.” 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). The Section 1997e(a)

exhaustion requirement applies to all prisoner suits relating to prison life. Porter v. Nussle, 435

U.S. 516, 532 (2002). Prisoners must complete the prison’s administrative process, regardless of

the relief sought by the prisoner and regardless of the relief offered by the process, as long as the

administrative process can provide some sort of relief on the complaint stated. Booth v. Churner,

532 U.S. 731, 741 (2001). "All 'available' remedies must now be exhausted; those remedies need

not meet federal standards, nor must they be 'plain, speedy, and effective." ' Porter, 534 U.S. at

524 (citing Booth, 532 U.S. at 739 n. 5). Exhaustion must occur prior to filing suit. McKinney

v. Carey, 311 F.3d 1198, 1199-1201 (9th Cir.2002) (emphasis added.). Thus, plaintiff may not

exhaust while the suit is pending. McKinney, 311 F.3d at 1199-1201. 

Here, the claims Plaintiff attempts to add by way of a Supplemental Complaint all arose

after he initiated this suit on February 10, 2006. In fact, Plaintiff states in his First Amended

Complaint filed on May 12, 2006, that since he filed this action, “all Defendants mentioned

herein, have subject Plaintiff to systematic retaliatory tactics; having harassed, threatened,

intimidated, stolen property ....” (Doc. 14 at 5.) Similarly, Plaintiff’s “Supplemental Complaint”

submitted on March 19, 2007, names different defendants and addresses newer violations

Plaintiff states have occurred since the filing of the First Amended Complaint. (Doc. 16. at 5.) 

As the allegations in both the First Amended Complaint and the recently filed “Supplemental

Complaint” arose after Plaintiff initiated this action, they are necessarily unexhausted, and would

be dismissed from the action. Should Plaintiff wish to pursue claims that arose after he initiated

this action, he must first exhaust them administratively and then file a separate action. Plaintiff

Case 1:06-cv-00187-NVW Document 17 Filed 03/22/07 Page 2 of 4
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

A cursory review of the Complaint shows that Plaintiff simply provides a statement of facts and then 2

separately lists his constitutional claims but does not indicate who was involved or how they were involved such that

the actions give rise to the violations alleged. 

3

may not continue to add new claims as they arise to the existing action. As stated above,

exhaustion must occur prior to filing suit and may not occur while the suit is pending. 

McKinney v. Carey, 311 F.3d 1198, 1199-1201 (9th Cir.2002). 

Should Plaintiff desire to amend his Complaint to omit any unexhausted claims, Plaintiff

is informed that applicable to his case is Rule 8(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Rule

8(a) calls for a “short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to

relief.” Rule 8(a) expresses the principle of notice-pleading, whereby the pleader need only give

the opposing party fair notice of a claim. Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46 (1957). Rule

8(a) does not require an elaborate recitation of every fact a plaintiff may ultimately rely upon at

trial, but only a statement sufficient to “give the defendant fair notice of what the plaintiff’s claim

is and the grounds upon which it rests.” Id. at 47. 

Plaintiff’s original complaint here consists of approximately 200 pages and names fortyfive Defendants. These do not include the newly named Defendants named in the “Supplemental

documents.” Plaintiff’s Complaint, in its current form, does not meet the requirements of Rule

8(a) and in amending, Plaintiff should make every attempt to keep his allegations short and plain. 

In addition, in order to state a claim for relief, Plaintiff must link each named Defendant to an 2

act or omission giving rise to a constitutional violation. In other words, Plaintiff may not simply

tell a story and name several individuals leaving the Court to decide which facts go with which

Defendants and which allegations may or may not rise to the level of a constitutional violation. 

Plaintiff’s complaint must be specific, clear and brief. 

Finally, Plaintiff need to not submit exhibits and evidence at this stage in the proceedings. 

the Court cannot serve as a repository for the parties' evidence. Originals or copies of evidence

(i.e., prison or medical records, witness affidavits, etc.) should not be submitted until the course

of litigation brings the evidence into question (for example, on a motion for summary judgment,

at trial, or when requested by the court). At this point, the submission of evidence is premature

Case 1:06-cv-00187-NVW Document 17 Filed 03/22/07 Page 3 of 4
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

4

as the Plaintiff is only required to state a prima facie claim for relief. 

Accordingly, the Court HEREBY ORDERS: 

1. The Supplemental Complaint submitted on March 19, 2006, is STRICKEN from

the record; and 

2. Plaintiff is GRANTED thirty days to file a Second Amended Complaint should he

wish to do so; 

3. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to send Plaintiff a blank civil rights form. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: March 21, 2007 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

3b142a UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00187-NVW Document 17 Filed 03/22/07 Page 4 of 4