Denegal v. Farrell et al
ORDER denying 44 Motion for permission to expand the record signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 11/6/2017. (Lundstrom, T)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CASE NO. 1:15-cv-01251-DAD-MJS (PC)
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
PERMISSION TO EXPAND THE RECORD
R. FARRELL, et al.,
(ECF No. 44)
Plaintiff Dwayne Denegal, also known as Fatima Shabazz, is a state prisoner
proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action brought pursuant to 42
U.S.C. § 1983. The action proceeds on Plaintiff’s Fourteenth Amendment equal
protection claims against Defendants Coffin, Cryer, Lewis, and Sundaram, and Eighth
Amendment medical indifference claims against these Defendants and Defendant
Before the Court is Plaintiff’s September 15, 2017 motion for permission to
expand the record. (ECF No. 44.) Defendants filed no response and the time for doing
so has passed. The matter is submitted. Local Rule 230(l).
Plaintiff’s motion will be denied. To the extent Plaintiff intended to use her motion
to submit evidence in opposition to Defendants’ motion to dismiss, that motion to dismiss
since has been denied. (ECF No. 45.) Thus, any request in that regard is moot.
To the extent Plaintiff intends her submission to amend or supplement her
complaint, she is reminded that a complaint must be complete in itself without reference
to any prior pleading. Local Rule 220. If she wishes to include new or additional
allegations in this action, she must move to amend her complaint. Piecemeal allegations
will not be considered.
Finally, to the extent Plaintiff merely seeks to introduce additional evidence to
support her claims, her request is impermissible. Parties may not file evidence with the
Court until the course of litigation brings the evidence into question (for example, on a
motion for summary judgment, at trial, or when requested by the Court). Presently, no
motions for summary judgment are before the Court and no trial date has been set. In
this circumstance, the Court cannot and will not serve as a repository for Plaintiff’s
evidence (e.g., prison or medical records, affidavits, declarations, etc.).
Based on the foregoing, the motion for permission to expand the record is
IT IS SO ORDERED.
November 6, 2017
Michael J. Seng
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?