Trujillo v. Gomez et al

Filing 15

ORDER DENYING Plaintiff's 14 Motion for Exhibits, signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 3/2/2015. (Marrujo, C)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

GUILLERMO TRUJILLO,

12
13

Plaintiff,

Case No. 1:14-cv-01797 DLB PC
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION FOR EXHIBITS

v.
(Document 14)

14
15

GOMEZ, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff Guillermo Trujillo (“Plaintiff”) is a California state prisoner proceeding pro se in

18

this civil action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed this action on November 17, 2014. The

19

complaint is awaiting screening.

20

On December 8, 2014, Plaintiff filed a motion to file a “supplemental” complaint pursuant to

21

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a). On December 19, 2014, the Court issued an order explaining

22

that Plaintiff did not need leave to file an amended complaint at this stage of the proceedings. The

23

Court also provided Plaintiff with the requirements for amending.

24

On December 22, 2014, Plaintiff filed another motion to file a supplemental complaint. On

25

December 23, 2014, the Court disregarded Plaintiff’s motion. The Court informed Plaintiff that

26

could file an amended complaint, as explained by the prior order. The Court also explained to

27

Plaintiff that to the extent he wanted to add the allegations in the motion, he could not do so.

28
1

1
2
3

On December 18, 2014, Plaintiff filed a “motion for exhibits.” He attached two exhibits that
appear to relate to his original allegations.
On December 29, 2014, the Court disregarded the motion and returned the exhibits. The

4

Court explained that it was unclear whether Plaintiff would be filing an amended complaint, and the

5

Court would therefore not docket the exhibits. The Court told Plaintiff that he may file the exhibits

6

with an amended complaint.

7

On February 26, 2015, Plaintiff filed another motion “for presentation of exhibits.” He

8

attaches documents to support an interference with mail claim under the First Amendment.

9

However, Plaintiff’s operative complaint relates to excessive force, and the Court will not docket the

10
11
12

exhibits.
Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion is DENIED. The Clerk of Court is instructed to return
Plaintiff’s documents.

13
14
15
16

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Dennis

March 2, 2015

L. Beck

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2