Perez v. Corizon Health, et al.
ORDER Regarding Miscellaneous Filings 7 , 10 , signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 11/14/17. (Hellings, J)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CASE NO. 1:17-cv-01021-MJS (PC)
ORDER REGARDING MISCELLANEOUS
(ECF Nos. 7, 10)
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil
rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On November 7, 2017, the Court
screened Plaintiff’s complaint (ECF No.1) and dismissed it with leave to amend. (ECF
No. 9.) Plaintiff has now filed with the Court two letters with additional information and
allegations. (ECF. Nos. 7 & 10.)
Local Rule 220 requires that a complaint, or any amended complaint, be complete
in itself without reference to any prior pleading. The letters Plaintiff has filed seem to
relate to her claims but do not comply with Rule 220. The Court will not consider these
separately filed letters in the course of screening Plaintiff’s pleadings. If Plaintiff wishes
the material in these letters to be considered, she must include them in her amended
pleading or, if appropriate, in a separate suit.
Further, 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). Thus, to the extent Plaintiff intends her letters to
serve as evidentiary support for her complaint, they are not properly filed at this time.
The Court cannot and will not serve as a repository for Plaintiff’s evidence (e.g., prison or
medical records, affidavits, declarations, etc.).
Filing of such papers could subject to Plaintiff to sanctions. See Thompson v.
Housing Auth., 782 F.2d 829, 831 (9th Cir. 1986) (holding that in exercising its power to
control its own docket, the Court may impose sanctions).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
November 14, 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?