Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05877/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05877-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
W. Hill
Defendant
DeWayne Thompson
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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

DEWAYNE THOMPSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

W. HILL, Corrections Lt.,

Defendants.

 /

CV F 04 5877 AWI SMS P 

ORDER DISREGARDING MOTION TO

AMEND (Doc. 11.) 

 Dewayne Thompson (“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 June 22, 2004. On June 13, 2005, Plaintiff filed a

Motion to Amend his complaint. Plaintiff states that he wishes to add the “elites” of the

California Department of Corrections. 

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. Pro. 15(a). In this

case, a responsive pleading has been served. Therefore, plaintiff may not file an amended

complaint without leave of the court.

In this case, the case is still in the initial screening stage and there has been no responsive

pleading filed by the Defendants. Thus, Plaintiff may amend his Complaint without leave of

Case 1:04-cv-05877-JAT Document 12 Filed 06/22/05 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

court. However, Plaintiff is reminded that he must have exhausted his administrative remedies

prior to filing suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). Further, 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 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 Amended Complaint should be clearly and boldly titled

“AMENDED COMPLAINT,” reference the appropriate case number, and be an original signed

under penalty of perjury. 

Accordingly, the Court HEREBY ORDERS: 

1. The Motion to Amend is DISREGARDED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 21, 2005 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-05877-JAT Document 12 Filed 06/22/05 Page 2 of 2