Madsen v. Risenhoover et al

Filing 223

ORDER by Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong PLAINTIFFS 219 MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND COMPLAINT. (ndr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/20/2014)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3

OAKLAND DIVISION

4
5

RICK MADSEN,

No. C 09-5457 SBA (PR)

Plaintiff,
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND
COMPLAINT

6
vs.
7
8

SUE E. RISENHOOVER, et al.,
Defendants.

9
10

September 30, 2014, the Court determined that it would be beneficial to have

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

counsel assist Plaintiff in this action. Dkt. 218 at 1. Therefore, the Court referred this

12

action to the Federal Pro Bono Project to secure pro bono counsel to represent Plaintiff.

13

Id. The Court then temporarily stayed and administratively closed this action until the

14

Federal Pro Bono Project has secured counsel for Plaintiff. Id.

15

Before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend the complaint. Dkt. 219.

16

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) provides that leave to amend “shall be freely

17

given when justice so requires.” In considering whether to grant or deny a motion seeking

18

leave to amend a complaint, the court may consider whether there is bad faith, undue

19

delay, prejudice to the opposing party, futility in the amendment, and whether plaintiff has

20

previously amended his complaint. See Allen v. City of Beverly Hills, 911 F.2d 367, 373

21

(9th Cir. 1990).

22

In his motion for leave to amend, Plaintiff claims that the “inadequate medical care

23

treatment issue is ongoing and continuous” due to “discontinuations, delays and denials of

24

treatment.” Dkt. 219 at 1. Attached to the motion are his forty-paged amended complaint

25

along with fifteen pages of exhibits. Dkts. 219-1, 219-2. Because this action has been

26

stayed and administratively closed until counsel has been secured to represent Plaintiff, the

27

Court DENIES his motion for leave to amend without prejudice to refiling after counsel is

28

appointed.

1

This Order terminates Docket No. 219.

2

IT IS SO ORDERED.

3

Dated: 11/20/2014
____________________________________
SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG
United States District Judge

4
5
6

P:\PRO-SE\SBA\CR.09\Madsen5457.DenyAmend.docx

7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

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

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

RICK MADSEN,

Case No. 09-cv-05457-SBA

Plaintiff,
8
v.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

9
10

SUE E. RISENHOOVER, et al.,
Defendants.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S.
District Court, Northern District of California.
That on 11/20/2014, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing
said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by
depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery
receptacle located in the Clerk's office.

16
17
18

Rick Madsen ID: E10400
California State Prison - Sacramento
P.O. Box 290066
Represa, CA 95671

19
20
21

Dated: 11/20/2014

22
23

Richard W. Wieking
Clerk, United States District Court

24
25
26
27

By:________________________
Nikki D. Riley, Deputy Clerk to the
Honorable SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG

28
3