John Edward Mitchell v. Norton et al

Filing 12

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 5/21/2014 granting 11 Motion; striking 9 Request for leave to amend and 10 Amended Complaint and order for plaintiff to file new First Amended Complaint pursuant to 8 Order. (Lundstrom, T)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JOHN EDWARD MITCHELL,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

vs.
T. NORTON, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
17

1:12-cv-00331-GSA-PC
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S
REQUEST
(Doc. 11.)
ORDER STRIKING PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST
FOR LEAVE TO AMEND, AND FIRST
AMENDED COMPLAINT, BOTH FILED ON
MAY 16, 2014
(Docs. 9, 10.)
ORDER FOR PLAINTIFF TO FILE NEW
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
PURSUANT TO COURT’S ORDER OF MAY
9, 2014
(Doc. 8.)

18
19
20
21
22

I.

BACKGROUND

23

John Edward Mitchell (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

24

pauperis with this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On March 5, 2012, Plaintiff

25

filed the Complaint commencing this action. (Doc. 1.)

26

On March 13, 2012, Plaintiff consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction in this action

27

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 636(c), and no other parties have made an appearance. (Doc. 6.)

28

Therefore, pursuant to Appendix A(k)(4) of the Local Rules of the Eastern District of
1

1

California, the undersigned shall conduct any and all proceedings in the case until such time as

2

reassignment to a District Judge is required. Local Rule Appendix A(k)(3).

3

The court screened the Complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and issued an order on May

4

9, 2014, dismissing the Complaint for failure to state a claim, with leave to amend within thirty

5

days. (Doc. 8.) On May 16, 2014, Plaintiff filed a request to amend the complaint, together

6

with a First Amended Complaint. (Docs. 9, 10.) On May 19, 2014, Plaintiff filed a request to

7

dismiss the First Amended Complaint, without prejudice. (Doc. 11.)

8

II.

PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST

9

Plaintiff explains that he submitted the First Amended Complaint to the court before he

10

received the court’s order of May 9, 2014, and he now seeks to file a new First Amended

11

Complaint in compliance with the instructions in the court’s order.

12

Under these facts, the court finds good cause to strike the First Amended Complaint and

13

Plaintiff’s request to amend, which were filed on May 16, 2014. When a document is stricken,

14

it becomes a nullity and is not considered by the court for any purpose. Plaintiff may now file a

15

new First Amended Complaint in compliance with the court’s order of May 9, 2014.

16

III.

CONCLUSION

17

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

18

1.

Plaintiff’s request filed on May 19, 2014, is GRANTED;

19

2.

Plaintiff’s request to amend the complaint, and the First Amended Complaint,

20
21

both filed on May 16, 2014, are STRICKEN from the record; and
3.

Plaintiff may now file a new First Amended Complaint in compliance with the
court’s order of May 9, 2014.

22

23
24
25
26

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

May 21, 2014

/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

27
28
2