Dews v. Kern Radiology Medical Group, Inc. et al

Filing 14

ORDER Denying Plaintiff's Motion/Request/Notification To Supplement The First Amended Complaint (ECF No. 13 ), signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 3/26/2012. (Fahrney, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9

CLARENCE LEON DEWS,
Plaintiff,

10
11

CASE NO. 1:12-cv-00242-AWI-MJS PC
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION/REQUEST/NOTIFICATION TO
SUPPLEMENT THE FIRST AMENDED
COMPLAINT

v.

12
13

KERN RADIOLOGY MEDICAL GROUP,
INC.,

(ECF No. 13)

Defendants.

14

/
15
16

Clarence Leon Dews (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

17

pauperis in this civil rights action filed on February 21, 2012 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

18

Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint on March 2, 2012 (ECF No. 4) before the Court

19

had screened Plaintiff’s original Complaint. The Court has not yet screened the First

20

Amended Complaint either.

21

Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion/Request/Notification (ECF No. 13) to

22

supplement the First Amended Complaint. His request must be denied for the following

23

reasons.

24

Amended pleadings must be complete within themselves without reference to

25

another pleading. Partial amendments are not permissible. Local Rules for the U.S.D.C.

26

Eastern District, Rule 220. Plaintiff’s Motion/Request/Notification is not a complete

27

amended pleading. Any pleading must contain “a short and plain statement of the claim

28

showing that the pleader is entitled to relief ....“ Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2). Detailed factual
-1-

1

allegations are not required, but “[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action,

2

supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662,

3

129 S.Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009) (citing Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555

4

(2007)). A complaint standing alone must set forth “sufficient factual matter, accepted as

5

true, to ‘state a claim that is plausible on its face.’“ Id. Moreover, a Plaintiff may not

6

“supplement” as to events occurring prior to the date of the First Amended Complaint.

7

Fed.R.Civ.P 15(d).
The Court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief

8
9

against a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28

10

U.S.C. § 1915A(a). Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint is in line for screening. However,

11

the Court has a large number of prisoner civil rights cases pending before it and will screen

12

Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint in due course.

13

Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons, it is ORDERED that Plaintiff’s

14

Motion/Request/Notification (ECF No. 13) to supplement the First Amended Complaint is

15

DENIED.

16
17

IT IS SO ORDERED.

18

Dated:
ci4d6

March 26, 2012

Michael J. Seng

/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-