Bullock v. Wasco State Prison Medical

Filing 20

ORDER DIRECTING Clerk to File Third Amended Complaint Lodged on July 16, 2015, signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 8/20/15. (Marrujo, C)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

GORDON BULLOCK,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

vs.

1:14-cv-00092-GSA-PC
ORDER DIRECTING CLERK TO FILE
THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT
LODGED ON JULY 16, 2015
(ECF No. 17.)

WASCO STATE PRISON MEDICAL,

15

Defendant.

16
17
18
19
20
21

I.

BACKGROUND
Gordon Bullock (“Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis

22

in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ' 1983.

23

commencing this action on December 24, 2013, at the United States District Court for the

24

Northern District of California. (Doc. 1.) On January 8, 2014, the case was transferred to the

25

United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. (Doc. 5.) On March 31,

26

2014, Plaintiff consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction in this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. '

27

636(c), and no other parties have made an appearance. (Doc. 11.) Therefore, pursuant to

28

Appendix A(k)(4) of the Local Rules of the Eastern District of California, the undersigned shall
1

Plaintiff filed the Complaint

1

conduct any and all proceedings in the case until such time as reassignment to a District Judge

2

is required. Local Rule Appendix A(k)(3).

3

On November 13, 2014, the court dismissed the Complaint for failure to state a claim,

4

with leave to amend. (ECF No. 12.) On December 19, 2014, Plaintiff filed the First Amended

5

Complaint. (ECF No. 13.) On December 19, 2014, Plaintiff lodged a proposed Second

6

Amended Complaint. (ECF No. 14.) The court construed Plaintiff’s lodged Second Amended

7

Complaint as a motion for leave to amend, and on May 29, 2015, the court issued an order

8

granting Plaintiff leave to amend and directing the Clerk to file the lodged Second Amended

9

Complaint. (ECF No. 15.) The Second Amended Complaint was filed on May 29, 2015.

10

(ECF No. 16.) On July 16, 2015, Plaintiff lodged a proposed Third Amended Complaint.

11

(ECF No. 17.)

12

II.

DISCUSSION

13

Plaintiff indicates on the front page of the lodged Third Amended Complaint that he is

14

submitting the Third Amended Complaint in response to the court’s order of May 29, 2015.

15

(ECF No. 17 at 1.) Plaintiff also indicates that he is amending the complaint to identify

16

defendants whose names were not known at the time the original Complaint was filed. (Id.)

17

It is apparent that Plaintiff submitted the Third Amended Complaint with intent to

18

comply with the court’s May 29, 2015 order which granted him leave to amend the complaint.

19

ARule 15(a) is very liberal and leave to amend >shall be freely given when justice so requires.=@

20

AmerisourceBergen Corp. v. Dialysis West, Inc., 445 F.3d 1132, 1136 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting

21

Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)). However, courts Aneed not grant leave to amend where the amendment:

22

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

23

litigation; or (4) is futile.@ Id. The factor of A>[u]ndue delay by itself . . . is insufficient to

24

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

25

708, 712, 713 (9th Cir. 2001) (quoting Bowles v. Reade, 198 F.3d 752, 757-58 (9th Cir. 1999)).

26

Here, the court finds no bad faith or futility in Plaintiff’s amendment. The Third

27

Amended Complaint arises from the same events at issue in the Complaint for this action.

28

Because the Second Amended Complaint awaits the court’s requisite screening and has not
2

1

been served, there will be no undue delay or prejudice to Defendants in allowing Plaintiff to

2

proceed with the Third Amended Complaint.

3

Plaintiff is advised that if he seeks to amend the complaint in the future, he should file a

4

motion to amend and submit a proposed amended complaint for the court’s review.

5

III.

CONCLUSION

6

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

7

1.

8
9

The Clerk is directed to file the Third Amended Complaint which was lodged on

July 16, 2015; and
2

The Third Amended Complaint shall be screened in due course.

10
11
12
13

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

August 20, 2015

/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3