Fitch v. Galland

Filing 16

ORDER, signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 7/20/16. (Marrujo, C)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JOEY FITCH,

12
13
14
15
16

No. 1:16-cv-00489-DAD-JLT
Plaintiff,

v.

ORDER

JOSEPH GALLAND, CHRISTOPHER
KNUTSON, and JEFFERY WATTS,
Defendants.

17
18

Plaintiff Joey Fitch is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action

19

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On July 7, 2016, plaintiff filed a motion seeking leave to amend

20

his complaint as well as a first amended complaint. (Doc. Nos. 14–15.) As of that date,

21

defendant Joseph Galland had not yet been served in this action. Pursuant to Rule 15 of the

22

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of this court, plaintiff's complaint has

23

therefore been amended as a matter of course.

24

Accordingly,

25

1. Plaintiff’s first amended complaint (Doc. No. 15) is deemed the operative complaint in

26
27
28

this action;
2. Plaintiff's motion to amend the complaint (Doc. No. 14) is denied as having been
rendered moot; and
1

1

3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to update the case caption and docket to reflect the

2
3
4

newly named defendants in this action.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

July 20, 2016
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2