Ireland v. Penzone et al

Filing 25

ORDER - IT IS ORDERED denying Plaintiff's "Motion for Leave to Add and Drop Parties by Amended Pleading Filed Before Responsive Pleading is Served" (Doc. 19 ). (See document for complete details). Signed by Magistrate Judge Eileen S Willett on 11/17/20. (SLQ)

1

WO

2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

Howard George Ireland,
Plaintiff,

10
11

ORDER

v.

12

No. CV-20-00650-PHX-SRB (ESW)

Paul Penzone, et al.,

13

Defendants.

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

In its August 5, 2020 Order (Doc. 11), the Court denied Plaintiff’s request for
leave to file a First Amended Complaint as the proposed pleading improperly
incorporated by reference the two counts presented in his original Complaint. Plaintiff
renewed his request (Doc. 13), which the Court denied as Plaintiff again improperly
incorporated by reference portions of his original Complaint into his proposed First
Amended Complaint. (Doc. 16).
Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s “Motion for Leave to Add and Drop Parties
by Amended Pleading Filed Before Responsive Pleading is Served” (Doc. 19).

As

Defendant Penzone observes (Doc. 21 at 2), Plaintiff has again failed to comply with
Local Rule of Civil Procedure 15.1 as the proposed First Amended Complaint omits

25

Count I. To reiterate, “[a]ll causes of action alleged in an original complaint which are

26

not alleged in an amended complaint are waived.” King v. Atiyeh, 814 F.2d 565, 567 (9th

27
28

Cir. 1987), overruled on other grounds by Lacey v. Maricopa County, 693 F.3d 896 (9th
Cir. 2012). “Pro se litigants must follow the same rules of procedure that govern other

1
2
3
4

litigants.” Id.
IT IS ORDERED denying Plaintiff’s “Motion for Leave to Add and Drop Parties
by Amended Pleading Filed Before Responsive Pleading is Served” (Doc. 19).
Dated this 17th day of November, 2020.

5
6

Honorable Eileen S. Willett
United States Magistrate Judge

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-2-