1Amatucci has filed a complaint (document no. 1), and three

documents titled “Addendum to Complaint” (document nos. 7, 9 &

11). Although not strictly in compliance with the court’s local

rules governing “Motions to Amend,” see Rule 15.1 of the Local

Rules of the United States District Court for the District of New

Hampshire (“LR”), I will accept these four documents in the

aggregate as the complaint in this matter. Amatucci is advised,

however, that all further amendments must comport with the local

rule, which states:

(a) A party who moves to amend a filing shall (i) 

attach the proposed amended filing to the motion to 

amend, (ii) identify in the motion or a supporting 

memorandum any new factual allegations, legal claims, 

or parties, and (iii) explain why any new allegations, 

claims, or parties were not included in the original 

filing.

(b) Any amendment to a pleading, whether filed as a 

matter of course or upon a motion to amend, shall 

reproduce the entire filing as amended and may not 

incorporate any prior filing by reference, except by 

leave of court.

LR 15.1.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Josephine Amatucci

v. Civil No. 05-cv-259-SM

Charles Hamilton, et al.

O R D E R

Before the Court is Josephine Amatucci’s complaint1 alleging

that the defendants have violated her Fourth and Fourteenth

Amendment rights to due process by subjecting her to false arrest

Case 1:05-cv-00259-SM Document 13 Filed 01/20/06 Page 1 of 3
2In the Report and Recommendation issued this date, I have

recommended the dismissal of all other claims and defendants in

the complaint.

2

and detention. Because Amatucci is proceeding both pro se and in

forma pauperis, the matter is before the Court for preliminary

review to determine whether the complaint states any claim upon

which relief might be granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2);

United States District Court for the District of New Hampshire

Local Rule 4.3(d)(1)(B).

As fully discussed in the Report and Recommendation issued

simultaneously with this Order, and without further comment on

the merits of the claims, I find that Josephine Amatucci has

stated a claim upon which relief may be granted for false arrest

and detention against defendants James O’Brien and Charles

Hamilton.2 Accordingly, I order that the complaint (document

nos. 1, 7, 9 & 11) be served on those Defendants. Plaintiff has

already submitted summons forms for each of the defendants upon

whom service is authorized. The Clerk’s office is directed to

issue the summonses against defendants O’Brien and Hamilton and

to forward to the United States Marshal for the District of New

Hampshire (the “U.S. Marshal’s office”) the summonses and copies

of the complaint (document nos. 1, 7, 9 & 11), the Report and

Case 1:05-cv-00259-SM Document 13 Filed 01/20/06 Page 2 of 3
3

Recommendation issued this date, and this Order. Upon receipt of

the necessary documentation, the U.S. Marshal’s office shall

effect service upon Defendants. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(2). 

Defendants are instructed to answer or otherwise plead

within twenty days of service. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1)(A). 

Amatucci is instructed that all future pleadings, written

motions, notices, or similar papers shall be served directly on

the Defendants by delivering or mailing the materials to them or

their attorney(s), pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b). 

SO ORDERED.

________________________________

James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge

Date: January 20, 2006

cc: Josephine Amatucci, pro se 

Case 1:05-cv-00259-SM Document 13 Filed 01/20/06 Page 3 of 3