Martin v. Redwood City Library

Filing 24

ORDER DISCHARGING ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE; DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. Signed by Judge Kandis A. Westmore on 10/02/2015. (kawlc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/2/2015)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

YOHONIA MARTIN,

Case No. 15-cv-01988-KAW

Plaintiff,
8
v.
9
10

REDWOOD CITY LIBRARY,
Defendant.

ORDER DISCHARGING ORDER TO
SHOW CAUSE; DISMISSING
COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO
AMEND

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13

Yohania Martin ("Plaintiff"), who proceeds pro se, commenced the above-captioned case

14

on May 1, 2015. (Compl., Dkt. No. 1.) Plaintiff also filed an application to proceed in forma

15

pauperis. (Pl.'s IFP Appl., Dkt. No. 2.) She has consented to the undersigned's jurisdiction

16

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). (Pl.'s Consent, Dkt. No. 3.)

17

On May 14, 2015, the Court granted the application to proceed in forma pauperis and

18

dismissed the complaint with leave to amend. (May 14, 2015 Order, Dkt. No. 5.) In the order, the

19

Court instructed Plaintiff to file an amended complaint within 30 days. (Id.) Plaintiff failed to

20

comply. On July 20, 2015, the Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause why this case should not be

21

dismissed for failure to prosecute. (Order to Show Cause, Dkt. No. 16.) Plaintiff was to file a

22

written response to the order to show cause within 14 days. (Id. at 2.)

23

On July 27, 2015, Plaintiff filed a "Motion to Answer Order For Case To Not Be

24

Dismissed," Dkt. No. 17. The Court granted the motion and gave Plaintiff 30 days to file (1) a

25

response to the order to show cause and (2) an amended complaint, which were to be filed as

26

separate documents. (July 29, 2015 Order, Dkt. No. 18.) On August 10, 2015, Plaintiff filed both

27

documents. Accordingly, the Court hereby DISCHARGES the order to show cause.

28

Plaintiff's amended complaint, however, does not remedy the deficiencies discussed in

the Court's May 14, 2015 Order. For this reason, the amended complaint is DISMISSED WITH

2

LEAVE TO AMEND. Plaintiff shall file a second amended complaint within 30 days of this

3

order. Plaintiff is reminded that the second amended complaint will supersede earlier versions of

4

the complaint, such that they will be treated as nonexistent. See Armstrong v. Davis, 275 F.3d

5

849, 878 n.40 (9th Cir. 2001), abrogated on other grounds by Johnson v. Cal., 543 U.S. 499

6

(2005). For this reason, Plaintiff shall properly identify the legal and factual bases for all of her

7

claims, free of any reference to any prior complaint. See King v. Atiyeh, 814 F.2d 565, 567 (9th

8

Cir. 1987), overruled on other grounds by Lacey v. Maricopa Cnty., 693 F.3d 896 (9th Cir.

9

2012). The second amended complaint shall also contain allegations that establish this Court's

10

jurisdiction over this action. Failure to file a second amended complaint within 30 days of this

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

1

order may result in dismissal of this action for failure to prosecute. This will be Plaintiff's final

12

opportunity to amend the complaint to allege facts that establish this Court's jurisdiction and

13

state a plausible claim for relief.

14

To ensure that the second amended complaint complies with this order, Plaintiff may wish

15

to contact the Federal Pro Bono Project's Help Desk—a free service for pro se litigants—by

16

calling [phone]. The Court has also adopted a manual for use by pro se litigants, which

17

may be helpful to Plaintiff. This manual, and other free information is available online at:

18

http://cand.uscourts.gov/proselitigants.

19

Additionally, because there is no operative complaint in this case, Plaintiff's "Motion of

20

Submission of Affidavit of and for Plaintiff's Personal Financial Circumstance in Leitmotif," Dkt.

21

No. 21, "Motion to Submit Additional Evidence and Subpoena," Dkt. No. 22, and "Motion to

22

Submit Evidence," Dkt. No. 23, are TERMINATED.

23
24

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: 10/02/2015
__________________________________
KANDIS A. WESTMORE
United States Magistrate Judge

25
26
27
28
2