Christopher Lancaster v. Warden Richard B. Ives et al

Filing 15

MINUTE (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER (1) GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST TO ADD WARDEN IVES AS A DEFENDANT IN CASE NO. EDCV 17-13-JAK(AGR); and (2) DISMISSING WITHOUT PREJUDICE CASE NO. EDCV 17-927 AS DUPLICATIVE by Judge John A. Kronstadt. The Clerk is directed to file Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint in both Case No. EDCV 17-13 and Case No. EDCV 17-927. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Case No. 17-927 is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as duplicative of Case No. EDCV 17-13 JAK (AGR) now that Ives is a defendant in the earlier- filed case. Case Terminated. Made JS-6. (See Order for Further Details) (kl)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Case No.

EDCV 17-0013-JAK (AGR)
EDCV 17-0927-JAK (AGR)

Title

Christopher Lancaster v. Lt. Gabby, et al.
Christopher Lancaster v. Warden Richard Ives, et al.

Present: The
Honorable

Date

September 5, 2017

John A. Kronstadt, United States District Judge

Andrea Keifer

n/a

n/a

Deputy Clerk

Court Reporter / Recorder

Tape No.

Attorneys Present for Plaintiff:

Attorneys Present for Defendants:

None

None

Proceedings:

In Chambers: (1) GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST TO ADD
WARDEN IVES AS A DEFENDANT IN CASE NO. EDCV 17-13-JAK
(AGR); and (2) DISMISSING WITHOUT PREJUDICE CASE NO.
EDCV 17-927 AS DUPLICATIVE

Procedural History
On January 5, 2017, Plaintiff filed a civil rights complaint in Case No. EDCV 17-13-JAK (AGR)
in this court. He alleged various violations while housed at USP-Victorville. Warden Richard B. Ives
was not named as a defendant.
On December 19, 2016, Plaintiff filed a nearly identical complaint in the Southern District of
California, which transferred the action to this court on May 12, 2017. The case was assigned Case No.
EDCV 17-927-JAK (AGR). The complaint covered the same events, asserted the same claims and
sought the same compensatory damages as the complaint in EDCV 17-13. The one notable difference
was that Warden Richard B. Ives was named as a defendant.
Minute Order Dated May 19, 2017 and Plaintiff’s Response
On May 19, 2017, the magistrate judge issued a minute order that recited the procedural history
and gave Plaintiff two options:
1.

If Plaintiff did not wish to add Ives as a defendant in Case No. EDCV 17-13, Plaintiff
was required to file a Notice stating that he did not wish to add Ives as a defendant.

2.

If Plaintiff wished to add Ives as a defendant in Case No. EDCV 17-13, Plaintiff was
required to file a First Amended Complaint naming Ives as a defendant and adding
allegations as to why he should be liable for the various violations alleged. The court
would then dismiss without prejudice Case No. EDCV 17-927 as wholly duplicative of
Case No. EDCV 17-13.

CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Case No.

EDCV 17-0013-JAK (AGR)
EDCV 17-0927-JAK (AGR)

Date

Title

September 5, 2017

Christopher Lancaster v. Lt. Gabby, et al.
Christopher Lancaster v. Warden Richard Ives, et al.

On June 26, 2017, Plaintiff filed a document entitled “Motion for Leave to File an Amended
Complaint.” Plaintiff states that he simply forgot to add Richard B. Ives as a defendant (presumably in
Case No. EDCV 17-13), and also wishes to delete his request for nominal damages. Plaintiff requested
that the court grant leave to file an amended complaint.
Order
The Clerk is directed to file Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint in both
Case No. EDCV 17-13 and Case No. EDCV 17-927.
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion to add Defendant Richard B. Ives as a defendant in Case
No. EDCV 17-13 is GRANTED on the following terms and conditions:
1.

Plaintiff shall file a First Amended Complaint within 30 days after the entry of this
order that adds Richard B. Ives as a defendant. The First Amended Complaint must bear
the docket number EDCV 17-13-JAK (AGR), be labeled “First Amended Complaint”;
and be complete in and of itself without reference to the original complaint or any other
pleading, attachment or document. Local Rule 15-2. Plaintiff is advised that the First
Amended Complaint supersedes the original complaint and becomes the operative
complaint. The Clerk is directed to send Plaintiff a blank Central District civil rights
complaint form and a copy of the complaint in EDCV 17-927-JAK (AGR).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Case No. 17-927 is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE
as duplicative of Case No. EDCV 17-13 JAK (AGR) now that Ives is a defendant in the earlier-filed
case. See Adams v. Cal. Dep’t of Health Servs., 487 F.3d 684, 692 (9th Cir. 2007) (finding district court
could opt to dismiss without prejudice later-filed complaint as duplicative of pending complaint in the
interest of judicial economy and comprehensive disposition of litigation), overruled in part on other
grounds, Taylor v. Sturgell, 553 U.S. 880, 891 n.3 (2008).

Initials of Preparer

CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

ak

Page 2 of 2