Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_13-cv-02147/USCOURTS-azd-2_13-cv-02147-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
David Cooper
Plaintiff
Pilkington North America
Defendant

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 

WO 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

David Cooper,

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Pilkington North America, 

Defendant.

No. CV-13-02147-PHX-GMS

ORDER 

 On October 30, 2013, the Court dismissed Plaintiff’s Complaint with leave to 

amend. Plaintiff has filed an Amended Complaint. The Court will screen Plaintiff’s First 

Amended Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) before it is allowed to be served. 

Pursuant to that screening Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint is dismissed without 

leave to amend. 

I. First Amended Complaint

 A first amended complaint supersedes the original complaint. Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 

963 F.2d 1258, 1262 (9th Cir. 1992); Hal Roach Studios v. Richard Feiner & Co., 896 

F.2d 1542, 1546 (9th Cir. 1990). After amendment, the Court treats the original 

Complaint as nonexistent. Ferdik, 963 F.2d at 1262. Thus, the Court will consider only 

those claims raised in the First Amended Complaint against only those Defendants named 

in the First Amended Complaint. 

Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint again fails to state a claim on which relief 

may be granted. It is therefore dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). 

Case 2:13-cv-02147-GMS Document 6 Filed 11/14/13 Page 1 of 2
- 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 

II. Dismissal without Leave to Amend

 Because Plaintiff has failed to state a claim in his First Amended Complaint, the 

Court will dismiss his First Amended Complaint. “Leave to amend need not be given if a 

complaint, as amended, is subject to dismissal.” Moore v. Kayport Package Express, 

Inc., 885 F.2d 531, 538 (9th Cir. 1989). The Court’s discretion to deny leave to amend is 

particularly broad where Plaintiff has previously been permitted to amend his complaint. 

Sisseton-Wahpeton Sioux Tribe v. United States, 90 F.3d 351, 355 (9th Cir. 1996). 

Repeated failure to cure deficiencies is one of the factors to be considered in deciding 

whether justice requires granting leave to amend. Moore, 885 F.2d at 538. 

 Plaintiff has made two efforts at crafting a viable complaint and appears unable to 

do so despite specific instructions from the Court. The Court finds that further 

opportunities to amend would be futile. Therefore, the Court, in its discretion, will 

dismiss Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint without leave to amend. 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint (Doc. 5) and 

this action are dismissed for failure to state a claim, and the Clerk of Court must enter 

judgment accordingly. 

 Dated this 14th day of November, 2013. 

Case 2:13-cv-02147-GMS Document 6 Filed 11/14/13 Page 2 of 2