Latney v. Ruggiero et al

Filing 6

ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff shall have until 10/5/18 to file an amended complaint correcting the deficiencies noted in the Court's Order issued on 7/2/18. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall mail a copy of 2 the Court's Order to Plaintiff. Signed by Magistrate Judge George Foley, Jr on 9/4/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6

***

7

TONYA LATNEY,

8

Plaintiff,
v.

9
10

13

ORDER

KARLA RUGGIERO, et al.,
Defendants.

11
12

Case No. 2:17-cv-01748-JAD-GWF

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Response to the Court’s Order to Show Cause
(ECF No. 5), filed on August 30, 2018.

14

Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se and she submitted a complaint on June 26, 2017.

15

See Complaint (ECF No. 1-1). The Court issued a Screening Order (ECF No. 2) granting

16

Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis and screened the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

17

§ 1915(e). The undersigned found that Plaintiff’s complaint failed to state a valid Title VII and

18

breach of contract claim against Defendant Valley Health System Summerlin Hospital and allowed

19

her until July 30, 2018, to file an amended complaint correcting the noted deficiencies. On August

20

22, 2018, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause instructing Plaintiff to show cause why this

21

matter should not be dismissed for failure to file an amended complaint. Plaintiff represents that

22

she misunderstood a previous order and believed that her case was dismissed.

23

The Court will provide Plaintiff another opportunity to file an amended complaint to

24

correct the deficiencies noted in the Court’s order dismissing her Title VII claim against Defendant

25

Valley Health System Summerlin Hospital and her breach of contract claim without prejudice with

26

leave to amend. See ECF No. 2. Plaintiff shall file her amended complaint no later than October

27

5, 2018.

28
1

1

If Plaintiff elects to proceed in this action by filing an amended complaint, she is informed

2

that the court cannot refer to a prior pleading in order to make her amended complaint complete.

3

Local Rule 15–1 requires that an amended complaint be complete in itself without reference to any

4

prior pleading. This is because, as a general rule, an amended complaint supersedes the original

5

complaint. See Valdez-Lopez v. Chertoff, 656 F.3d 851, 857 (9th Cir. 2011); see Loux v. Rhay,

6

375 F.2d 55, 57 (9th Cir.1967). Once Plaintiff files an amended complaint, the original pleading

7

no longer serves any function in the case. Therefore, in an amended complaint, as in an original

8

complaint, each claim and the involvement of each defendant must be sufficiently alleged.

9

Plaintiff is advised that litigation will not commence upon the filing of an amended complaint.

10

Rather, the Court will need to conduct an additional screening of the amended complaint pursuant

11

to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e).

12

deficiencies identified above, the Court will recommend that the complaint be dismissed with

13

prejudice. Accordingly,

If Plaintiff fails to file an amended complaint or fails to cure the

14

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff shall have until October 5, 2018 to file an

15

amended complaint correcting the deficiencies noted in the Court’s Order issued on July 2, 2018.

16

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall mail a copy of the Court’s

17
18

Order (ECF No. 2) to Plaintiff.
Dated this 4th day of September, 2018.

19
20
GEORGE FOLEY, JR.
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2