Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-00506/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-00506-2/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 11cv0506 JLS (POR)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ARTHUR RAY DEERE, SR,

CDCR #F-94040,

Civil No. 11-CV-0506 JLS (POR)

Plaintiff, ORDER DISMISSING THIRD

AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR

FAILING TO COMPLY WITH THE

COURT’S ORDER

vs.

EDMUND G. BROWN, SR; MATTHEW

CATES; L.S. McEWEN; JAMES M.A; 

DR. E. ESTOCK; DR. CASIAN; DR. D.

HERPE;

Defendants.

On March 9, 2011, Arthur Ray Deere, Jr. (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner currently incarcerated

at Calipatria State Prison located in Calipatria, California, and proceeding pro se, submitted a civil

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Before the Court could conduct the required sua sponte

screening, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint (“FAC”), along with a Motion to Proceed In

Forma Pauperis (“IFP”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a).

On June 24, 2011, the Court granted Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed IFP and sua sponte

dismissed his First Amended Complaint for failing to state a claim upon which relief could be

granted. (See June 24, 2011 Order at 7-8.) Plaintiff was granted leave to file an Amended

Complaint in order to correct the deficiencies of pleading identified in the Court’s Order. Id. On

Case 3:11-cv-00506-JLS-POR Document 9 Filed 02/16/12 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 11cv0506 JLS (POR)

July 15, 2011, Plaintiff filed his Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”). Once again, the Court

conducted the required sua sponte screening and found that Plaintiff had failed to state a claim. (See

Nov. 2, 2011 Order at 6.) Plaintiff was granted leave to file a Third Amended Complaint in order to

correct the deficiencies of pleading and Plaintiff filed his Third Amended Complaint on December

12, 2011.

Although Plaintiff has filed what he entitles “Third Amended Complaint” in this action, this

pleading contains facts, allegations and Defendants that are completely different than those facts and

allegations found in his original, First and Second Amended Complaints. Thus, it appears that

Plaintiff is really attempting to file an entirely new action. The Court permitted Plaintiff leave to file

an Amended Complaint to correct the deficiencies of pleading identified in the Court’s previous

Orders. Plaintiff was not granted leave to file an entirely new action. If Plaintiff wishes to pursue

an action based on the facts he is now raising for the first time, he must file a separate action.

Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES Plaintiff’s Third Amended Complaint for failing to

comply with a Court Order. The Court sua sponte GRANTS Plaintiff an extension of time to file a

Fourth Amended Complaint that complies with the Court’s November 2, 2011 Order. Plaintiff is

GRANTED forty five (45) days leave from the date this Order is docketed in which to file a Fourth

Amended Complaint which complies with the Court’s November 2, 2011 Order. Plaintiff’s

Amended Complaint must be complete in itself without reference to the superseded pleading. See

S.D. Cal. Civ. L. R. 15.1. Defendants not named and all claims not re-alleged in the Amended

Complaint will be deemed to have been waived. See King v. Atiyeh, 814 F.2d 565, 567 (9th Cir.

1987). Further, if Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be

granted, it may be dismissed without further leave to amend and may hereafter be counted as a

“strike” under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See McHenry v. Renne, 84 F.3d 1172, 1177-79 (9th Cir. 1996). 

The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a form § 1983 complaint to Plaintiff.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: February 16, 2012

Honorable Janis L. Sammartino

United States District Judge

Case 3:11-cv-00506-JLS-POR Document 9 Filed 02/16/12 Page 2 of 2