Gonzales v. Tate

Filing 35

ORDER Denying Plaintiff's Motions To Supplement (ECF No. 21 , 24 ), signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 9/19/2013. (Fahrney, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
10

JIMMY GONZALES,
Plaintiff,

11
12

CASE NO. 1:11-cv-01997-AWI-MJS PC
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS
TO SUPPLEMENT

v.
(ECF No. 21, 24)

13
14

HAROLD TATE.,
Defendant.
/

15
16
17

Plaintiff Jimmy Gonzales (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in
forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

18

On February 1, 2013, Plaintiff filed a motion to submit an additional exhibit to the

19

Court. (ECF No. 21.) On February 24, 2013, he filed a motion asking the Court to keep

20

a record of the retaliation he has encountered in response to his having filed this litigation.

21

(ECF No. 24.) Plaintiff’s motions are now before the Court.

22

In the first motion, Plaintiff states that he forgot to include a document regarding

23

his medical care. (ECF No. 21.) In the second, he alleges he has been denied medical

24

care because he filed this lawsuit and wants the Court to consider this fact when making

25

decisions in his case. (ECF No. 24.)

26

The only practical way to accommodate Plaintiff’s requests would be to supplement

27

his Amended Complaint with this additional information. Thus these motions are deemed

28

to be motions to supplement the Third Amended Complaint
1

Amended pleadings must be complete within themselves without reference to

1
2

another pleading. Partial amendments are not permissible. Local Rule 220.
Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motions to supplement (ECF Nos. 21 & 23) are DENIED.

3
4
5

IT IS SO ORDERED.

6

Dated:
ci4d6

September 19, 2013

Michael J. Seng

/s/
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