Wright v. McGovern et al

Filing 20

ORDER STRIKING AMENDMENT TO COMPLAINT. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 2/20/15. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/20/2015)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

FRANKLIN H. WRIGHT,

Case No. 14-cv-05525-RS

Plaintiff,
11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

v.

ORDER STRIKING AMENDMENT TO
COMPLAINT

12
13

POPS MCGOVERN, et al.,
Defendants.

14
15

In response to the prior order dismissing pro se plaintiff Franklin H. Wright’s initial

16

complaint with leave to amend, plaintiff has filed an amendment to the dismissed complaint. This

17

filing must be stricken pursuant to Civil Local Rule 10-1, however, which provides that a party

18

filing or moving to file an amended pleading “must reproduce the entire proposed pleading and

19

may not incorporate any part of a prior pleading by reference,” as plaintiff attempts to do. The

20

Ninth Circuit furthermore has instructed that an amended complaint supersedes the prior

21

complaint, and must be complete unto itself without reference to prior or superseded pleadings.

22

See King v. Atiyeh, 814 F.2d 565, 567 (9th Cir. 1987). If plaintiff wishes to file an amended

23

complaint, it therefore must stand without reference to other pleadings; and must be timely filed

24

according to the prior order granting plaintiff’s request for extension of time (Docket No. 18).

25

IT IS SO ORDERED.

26

Dated: February 20, 2015

27
28

______________________________________
RICHARD SEEBORG
United States District Judge