(PC) Brown v. Rodriguez et al

Filing 24

ORDER DENYING 23 Motion for Amended Complaint to be Rescreened as MOOT signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 6/16/2020. (Sant Agata, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

MARK ANTHONY BROWN,
Plaintiff,

11
12

CASE NO. 1:20-cv-00661-EPG
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
AMENDED COMPLAINT TO BE
RESCREENED AS MOOT

v.

13
14

A. JARAMILLO, et al.,

(ECF No. 23)

Defendants.

15
16
17
18

On June 15, 2020, Plaintiff Mark Anthony Brown filed a motion entitled “Motion for

19

Amended Complaint to be Rescreened by Magistrate Judge.” (ECF No. 23). Plaintiff’s request

20

was “that this amended claim be screened, and that Plaintiff not be recharged another court fee

21

. . . .” (Id. at 2).

22

Plaintiff appears to have drafted his motion on June 7, 2020. (Id. at 3) (date of signature).

23

The day after, the Court screened Plaintiff’s complaint. (ECF No. 20). The Court has not charged

24

Plaintiff a second filing fee; rather, the case is proceeding with the amended complaint. (Id. at 1

25

n.1) (“The Court notes that the events in the first amended complaint do not relate to those in the

26

original complaint. However, in the interests of justice, the Court will accept the first amended

27

complaint.”).

28
1

1
2

Plaintiff has already received his requested relief. The motion (ECF No. 23) is therefore
DENIED AS MOOT.

3
4
5
6

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

June 16, 2020

/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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