McMaster v. Spearman et al

Filing 26

ORDER DENYING Motion Seeking Leave to Amend as Moot 25 , signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 1/14/13: Any future amendments, however, must be accompanied by a motion seeking leave to amend. (Hellings, J)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6
7

DANA McMASTER,

8

CASE NO. 1:10-cv-01407-SKO PC
Plaintiff,

9

ORDER DENYING MOTION SEEKING
LEAVE TO AMEND AS MOOT

v.
(Doc. 25)

10

M. E. SPEARMAN, et al.,

11

Defendants.
/

12
13

Plaintiff Dana McMaster, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this

14

civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on August 6, 2010. On January 9, 2013, Plaintiff

15

filed a motion seeking leave to file his second amended complaint, which was received and filed on

16

January 3, 2013.

17

Plaintiff had the right to amend once as a matter of course without leave of court and for that

18

reason, his second amended complaint was filed when received on January 3, 2013.1 Fed. R. Civ.

19

P. 15(a). Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion seeking leave to amend is HEREBY DENIED as moot.

20

Any future amendments, however, must be accompanied by a motion seeking leave to amend.

21
22

IT IS SO ORDERED.

23

Dated:
ie14hj

January 14, 2013

/s/ Sheila K. Oberto
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

24
25
26
27
1

28

On January 7, 2013, the Court issued orders directing the United States Marshal to initiate service on S.
Espitia and directing Defendants Carlson, Garcia, and Sedwick to file an answer to the second amended complaint.

1