Coleman v. Moon

Filing 10

ORDER GRANTING 9 Plaintiff's Motion to File Third Amended Complaint signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 8/26/2013. Third Amended Complaint due within thirty (30) days. (Jessen, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ROBERT E. COLEMAN,

12

Plaintiff,

13

v.

14

J. MOON,

15

Case No. 1:12-cv-01471 DLB PC
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION TO FILE THIRD
AMENDED COMPLAINT
(Document 9)

Defendant.

16
17

Plaintiff Robert E. Coleman (“Plaintiff”) is a California state prisoner proceeding pro se and

18

in forma pauperis in this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff his complaint on September

19

10, 2012, and filed a First Amended Complaint as of right on October 11, 2012. The Court screened

20

the First Amended Complaint and dismissed it with leave to amend on April 8, 2013. Plaintiff

21

submitted his Second Amended Complaint on April 25, 2013. The Second Amended Complaint is

22

awaiting screening pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a).

23

On August 22, 2013, Plaintiff filed a Motion to File a Third Amended Complaint.

24

DISCUSSION

25

“Rule 15(a) is very liberal and leave to amend ‘shall be freely given when justice so

26

requires.’” AmerisourceBergen Corp. v. Dialysis West, Inc., 465 F.3d 946, 951 (9th Cir. 2006)

27

(quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)). However, courts “need not grant leave to amend where the

28

amendment: (1) prejudices the opposing party; (2) is sought in bad faith; (3) produces an undue
1

1

delay in the litigation; or (4) is futile.” Id. The factor of “‘[u]ndue delay by itself . . . is insufficient

2

to justify denying a motion to amend.’” Owens v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc., 244 F.3d

3

708, 712-13 (9th Cir. 2001) (quoting Bowles v. Reade, 198 F.3d 752, 757-58 (9th Cir. 1999)).

4

Here, Plaintiff seeks to add a First Amendment retaliation claim against the sole Defendant,

5

Dr. J. Moon. The allegations appear related to events occurring in 2008 and 2009, which is the same

6

time period at issue in the pending Second Amended Complaint.
Accordingly, the Court will permit Plaintiff to amend his complaint. Plaintiff’s motion is

7
8

GRANTED and he shall file a Third Amended Complaint within thirty (30) days of the date of

9

service of this order.

10

Plaintiff is reminded that an amended complaint supersedes the original complaint, Lacey v.

11

Maricopa County, 693 F.3d 896, 907 n.1 (9th Cir. 2012) (en banc), and it must be “complete in itself

12

without reference to the prior or superseded pleading.” Local Rule 220.

13
14

IT IS SO ORDERED.

15

Dated:

/s/ Dennis

August 26, 2013

L. Beck

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

16

DEAC_Signature-END:

17

3b142a

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2