Manriquez v. Tilton, et al

Filing 13

ORDER Requiring Plainitff to File Amended Complaint That Sets Forth Only Claims Arising Out of Plaintiff's Segregation and Revalidation As A Prison Gang Member While Housed At Corcoran State Prison, signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 4/21/11. Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint Due June 15, 2011. (Attachments: # 1 Amended Complaint Form)(Gonzalez, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9

DANIEL MANRIQUEZ,

CASE NO.

1:11-cv-537-MJS (PC)

10
Plaintiff,

11
12
13
14
15
16

v.
JAMES TILTON, et al.,
Defendants.

ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO FILE
AMENDED COMPLAINT THAT SETS
FORTH ONLY CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF
PLAINTIFF’S SEGREGATION AND REVALIDATION AS A PRISON GANG MEMBER
WHILE HOUSED AT CORCORAN STATE
PRISON
/ PLAINTIFF’S SECOND AMENDED
COMPLAINT DUE JUNE 15, 2011

17
18
19
20

Plaintiff Daniel Manriquez (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in
forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The operative
Complaint in this case sets forth forty-seven causes of action against forty-seven different

21
22

Defendants. On March 30, 2011, the Northern District of California screened Plaintiff’s

23

Complaint, dismissed certain claims, and transferred the remaining claims to this Court.

24

(ECF No. 10.) As a result, the only claims pending are those related to events that

25

occurred in or after January 2005 while Plaintiff was housed at Corcoran State Prison.

26
27

The only version of the Complaint on file with the Court is nearly ninety pages long
and devotes a significant portion to claims that were dismissed by the Northern District.

1

As such, it does not reflect the current posture of the case and is confusing.

2
3

Accordingly, Plaintiff is ORDERED to file an amended complaint setting forth only
the causes of action that arose out of his confinement at Corcoran State Prison relating to

4
5

his placement in administrative segregation and his re-validation as a member of the

6

Mexican Mafia prison gang. Plaintiff's amended complaint should be brief, Fed. R. Civ. P.

7

8(a), but must state what each named defendant did that led to the deprivation of Plaintiff’s

8

constitutional or other federal rights. Although accepted as true, the “[f]actual allegations

9

must be [sufficient] to raise a right to relief above the speculative level . . . .” Twombly, 550

10

U.S. at 555 (citations omitted). Finally, an amended complaint supercedes the original

11
12

complaint, Forsyth v. Humana, Inc., 114 F.3d 1467, 1474 (9th Cir. 1997); King v. Atiyeh,

13

814 F.2d 565, 567 (9th Cir. 1987), and must be “complete in itself without reference to the

14

prior or superceded pleading,” Local Rule 220.

15
16

Plaintiff’s amended complaint shall be filed not later than June 15, 2011. Failure
to comply with this order may result in dismissal of this action for failure to prosecute.

17
18
19

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20

Dated:

21

97k110

22
23
24
25
26
27

April 21, 2011

/s/

Michael J. Seng

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE