Castle v. Sepulveda

Filing 13

ORDER by Judge Lucy H. Koh granting 8 Motion to Amend/Correct ; Plaintiff is required to E-FILE the amended document; denying 10 Motion for Extension of Time to File; denying 12 Motion for Extension of Time to File Amended Complaint due by 12/10/2012. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service) (mpb, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/9/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11

SY LEE CASTLE,

12
13

Plaintiff,
vs.

14
M. SEPULVEDA,
15
Defendant.
16
17

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. C 12-2193 LHK (PR)
ORDER GRANTING
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO
AMEND; DENYING
DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR
EXTENSION OF TIME;
DENYING PLAINTIFF’S FOR
EXTENSION OF TIME
(Doc. Nos. 8, 10, 12.)

Plaintiff, a California state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a civil rights action under 42

18

U.S.C. § 1983, against Dr. M. Sepulveda. The Court issued an order of service on August 12,

19

2012. (Doc. No. 6.) Plaintiff has filed a motion requesting permission to amend the complaint.

20

(Doc. No. 8.) A plaintiff may amend the complaint “once as a matter of course within [] 21 days

21

after serving it.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1)(A). But, if the complaint requires a responsive

22

pleading, a plaintiff may amend the complaint “21 days after service of a responsive pleading, or

23

21 days after service of a motion under Rule 12(b), (e), or (f), whichever is earlier.” Fed. R. Civ.

24

P. 15(a)(1)(B). In all other cases, a plaintiff must obtain the defendant’s consent or leave of

25

Court to amend a complaint. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). Defendant has indicated that he “does not

26

oppose Plaintiff’s motion to amend[.]” (Doc. No. 10 at 2.) Thus, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff

27

leave to amend his complaint. See id. (“The court should freely give leave [to amend] when

28

justice so requires.”). Plaintiff shall file an AMENDED COMPLAINT within thirty days from
Order Granting Motion to Amend; Denying Extensions of Time
G:\PRO-SE\SJ.LHK\CR.12\Castle193amend-eots.wpd

1

the date this order is filed. The amended complaint must include the caption and civil case

2

number used in this order (C 12-2193 LHK (PR)) and the words AMENDED COMPLAINT on

3

the first page. Failure to file an amended complaint within thirty days and in accordance

4

with this order will result in the Court proceeding with the cognizable claim found in

5

Plaintiff’s original complaint. Plaintiff is advised that an amended complaint supersedes the

6

original complaint. “[A] plaintiff waives all causes of action alleged in the original complaint

7

which are not alleged in the amended complaint.” London v. Coopers & Lybrand, 644 F.2d 811,

8

814 (9th Cir. 1981). The briefing schedule set forth in the Court’s order dated August 12, 2012

9

is VACATED pending further order of the Court.

10

Additionally, Plaintiff has filed a motion for extension of time to respond to Defendant’s

11

answer to his complaint (Doc. No. 12), and Defendant has filed a motion for extension of time to

12

file a dispositive motion to the complaint. (Doc. No. 10.) Both Plaintiff’s and Defendant’s

13

motions are DENIED as moot.

14
15

This order terminates docket numbers 8, 10 and 12.

16

IT IS SO ORDERED.

17
18

DATED:

11/8/12

LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Order Granting Motion to Amend; Denying Extensions of Time
G:\PRO-SE\SJ.LHK\CR.12\Castle193amend-eots.wpd 2