Ford v. King et al

Filing 41

ORDER OVERRULING Plaintiff's 40 Objections to Screening of First Amended Complaint, signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 12/27/18. (Gonzalez, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

DARREN VINCENT FORD,

12
13
14

Plaintiff,
v.
KING, et al.,

15

Case No. 1:17-cv-00822-DAD-BAM (PC)
ORDER OVERRULING PLAINTIFF’S
OBJECTIONS TO SCREENING OF FIRST
AMENDED COMPLAINT
(ECF No. 40)

Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff Darren Vincent Ford (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in

18

forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed a first

19

amended complaint on October 26, 2018. (ECF No. 34.) The first amended complaint has not

20

yet been screened.

21

In response to several motions to initiate service of the complaint on the defendants, (ECF

22

Nos. 35, 38), Plaintiff has been informed that the Court is required to screen complaints brought

23

by prisoners seeking relief against a governmental entity or officer or employee of a

24

governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). Plaintiff has also been informed that the Court will

25

direct service of process only after Plaintiff’s complaint has been screened and found to state

26

cognizable claims for relief. (ECF Nos. 36, 39.)

27
28

On December 20, 2018, Plaintiff filed an objection to the Court’s screening of the
amended complaint. (ECF No. 40.) Plaintiff contends that the original complaint in this action
1

1

was screened and accepted with merit. Therefore, Plaintiff argues that a screening of the

2

amended complaint is an unnecessary delay. (Id.)

3

In the Court’s order granting Plaintiff’s eight separate motions to amend, Plaintiff was

4

advised that his amended complaint would supersede the original complaint. (ECF No. 28, p. 5.)

5

Thereafter, Plaintiff filed his first amended complaint, superseding the original complaint and any

6

claims that he may have stated therein. As such, a screening of the first amended complaint

7

remains necessary.

8
9

Plaintiff is reminded that the Court screens complaints in the order in which they are filed
and strives to avoid delays whenever possible. However, there are hundreds of prisoner civil

10

rights cases presently pending before the Court, and delays are inevitable. Plaintiff’s first

11

amended complaint will be screened in due course.

12
13

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s objections to the screening of his first amended complaint, (ECF
No. 40), are HEREBY OVERRULED.

14
15
16

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Barbara

December 27, 2018

A. McAuliffe

_

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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