Nassor v. U.S. Department of Education

Filing 7

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 3/19/2018 ORDERING the Court ORDERS the parties to conform to the following schedule. By 3/30/2018, Plaintiff Anthony Nassor shall file his amended complaint. By 5/14/2018, Defendant shall file its response, by motion or otherwise. (Reader, L)

1 McGREGOR W. SCOTT
United States Attorney
2 PHILIP A. SCARBOROUGH (SBN 254934)
Assistant United States Attorney
3 501 I Street, Suite 10-100
Sacramento, CA 95814
4 Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
5 [e-mail]
6 Attorneys for Defendant
7

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

Plaintiff,

11

DEFENDANT’S STATEMENT REGARDING
PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE TO AMEND CLAIM

v.

12
13

CASE NO. 2:18-CV-00250-JAM-AC

ANTHONY NASSOR,

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION,
Defendant.

14
15
16

Defendant the United States Department of Education respectfully submits this statement

17 regarding Plaintiff Anthony Nassor’s Notice to Amend Claim, filed with the Court on February 26,
18 2018. ECF 4.
19

Defendant does not oppose Plaintiff’s request to file an amended complaint. See Fed. R. Civ. P.

20 15(a). Under this Court’s rules and the governing law, an amended complaint supersedes the original
21 complaint and, therefore, must be a stand-alone document. E.D. Cal. Local R. 220 (“[E]very pleading to
22 which an amendment or supplement is permitted as a matter of right or has been allowed by court order
23 shall be retyped and filed so that it is complete in itself without reference to the prior or superseded
24 pleading.”); Forsyth v. Humana, Inc., 114 F.3d 1467, 1474 (9th Cir. 1997) (noting that an “amended
25 complaint supersedes the original, the latter being treated thereafter as non-existent”); Elder v.
26 Swarthout, 2015 WL 4730370, at *1 n.5 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 10, 2015) (“[A]s a general rule, an amended
27 complaint supersedes the original complaint.”). But Plaintiff’s Notice to Amend Claim, ECF 4, does not
28
DEFENDANT’S STATEMENT REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S
NOTICE TO AMEND CLAIM AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

1

1 appear to contain a complete restatement of his allegations in this case or otherwise include his proposed
2 amended complaint.
3

Accordingly, Defendant requests that the Court issue an order allowing Plaintiff to file an

4 amended complaint within approximately 30 days, and allowing Defendant 45 days to file a response,
5 by motion or otherwise, as reflected in the proposed order below.
Respectfully submitted,

6
7 Dated: February 27, 2018

McGREGOR W. SCOTT
United States Attorney

8
9

By: /s/ Philip A. Scarborough
PHILIP A. SCARBOROUGH
Assistant United States Attorney

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

[PROPOSED] ORDER
GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, the Court orders as follows.
Plaintiff Anthony Nassor has filed a Notice to Amend Claim. ECF 4. Defendant the United
States Department of Education does not oppose Plaintiff’s request to amend his complaint. An
amended complaint supersedes the original complaint and therefore must contain all allegations
sufficient to state a claim without referring to the original complaint. See E.D. Cal. Local Rule 220;
Forsyth v. Humana, Inc., 114 F.3d 1467, 1474 (9th Cir. 1997). Plaintiff’s Notice to Amend Claim does
not appear to comply with this standard.
Accordingly, the Court orders the parties to conform to the following schedule. By March 30,
2018, Plaintiff Anthony Nassor shall file his amended complaint. By May 14, 2018, Defendant shall file
its response, by motion or otherwise.
SO ORDERED.
DATED: March 19, 2018

25
26
27
28
DEFENDANT’S STATEMENT REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S
NOTICE TO AMEND CLAIM AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

2