Brown v. United States of America, et al.

Filing 27

ORDER DENYING 26 Motion to Add Information to Plaintiff's Prior Motions, signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 8/23/2013. (Marrujo, C)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JOSEPH A. BROWN,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

vs.

1:12-cv-00165-AWI-GSA-PC
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO ADD
INFORMATION
TO
PLAINTIFF’S
PRIOR MOTIONS
(Doc. 26.)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
17

I.

BACKGROUND

18

Joseph A. Brown ("Plaintiff") is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

19

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to Bivens vs. Six Unknown Agents, 403 U.S. 388

20

(1971). Plaintiff filed the Complaint commencing this action on February 6, 2012. (Doc. 1.)

21

On April 4, 2012, Plaintiff filed the First Amended Complaint. (Doc. 7.) On February 8, 2013,

22

Plaintiff filed the Second Amended Complaint. (Doc. 21.)

23

On August 9, 2013, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Injunctive Relief and a Motion for

24

Leave to Amend the Complaint. (Docs. 22, 23.) On August 19, 2013, the court granted

25

Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Amend the Complaint, allowing Plaintiff thirty days in which to

26

file a Third Amended Complaint. (Doc. 24.)

27
28

On August 22, 2013, Plaintiff filed a motion for the court to allow him to add
information to his motions of August 9, 2013. (Doc. 26.)
1

1

II.

LOCAL RULE 220

2

Local Rule 220 provides, in part:

3

Unless prior approval to the contrary is obtained from the Court, every
pleading to which an amendment or supplement is permitted as a matter of right
or has been allowed by court order shall be retyped and filed so that it is
complete in itself without reference to the prior or superseded pleading. No
pleading shall be deemed amended or supplemented until this Rule has been
complied with. All changed pleadings shall contain copies of all exhibits
referred to in the changed pleading.

4
5
6
7

Plaintiff has submitted information, requesting the court to allow him to make additions

8

to prior motions he filed on August 9, 2013. However, under Rule 220, Plaintiff may not

9

amend pleadings by adding information piecemeal after the pleadings have been filed. To add

10

information or correct an error in a previously-filed motion, Plaintiff must file a new, amended

11

motion which is complete within itself. Therefore, Plaintiff’s motion to add information to his

12

prior motions shall be denied.

13

Further, Plaintiff is reminded that his Motion for Leave to Amend the Complaint, filed

14

on August 9, 2013, was already granted on August 19, 2013. (Doc. 24.) Therefore, at this

15

stage of the proceedings, any request to add information to the August 9, 2013 Motion for

16

Leave to Amend the Complaint is moot.

17

III.

18
19

CONCLUSION
Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion to add information to his

prior motions is DENIED.

20
21
22
23

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

24
25
26

August 23, 2013

/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

DEAC_Signature-END:

6i0kij8d

27
28
2