Fernandez v. Jackson et al

Filing 20

ORDER Application to Proceed in Forma Pauperis ECF No. 1 is reinstated and deferred. If Plaintiff chooses to file an amended complaint curing deficiencies, the amended complaint is due by October 16, 2016. Clerk to send Plaintiff the appro ved form for filing a § 1983 complaint, instructions, original Complaint ECF No. 4 , original Screening Order ECF No. 3 and Ninth Circuit Order ECF. No. 16 . If an amended complaint is not filed, Plaintiff must file a written notice informing the Court of his intent to proceed with this case. If Plaintiff fails to file an amended complaint and/or notify the Court of his intent by October 16, 2016, this case will be dismissed with prejudice. See Order for further details. Signed by Judge Robert C. Jones on 09/16/2016. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KW)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 12 ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) BRET JACKSON et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ) ___________________________________ ) 13 I. 7 8 9 10 11 KEVIN FERNANDEZ, 3:13-cv-00670-RCJ-WGC ORDER DISCUSSION 14 On April 3, 2014, this Court denied Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis 15 and dismissed his complaint, with prejudice, as amendment would be futile, for failure to state 16 a claim. (ECF No. 3 at 6-7). The Clerk of Court entered judgment the same day. (ECF No. 17 5). Plaintiff appealed. (ECF No. 6). On August 4, 2016, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals 18 affirmed in part, reversed in part, vacated in part, and remanded. (ECF No. 16 at 4). 19 In light of the Ninth Circuit’s order, the Court now finds that Count I, alleging retaliation, 20 shall proceed against Defendants Jackson and Marikami but grants Plaintiff leave to amend 21 Count I in order to give Plaintiff an opportunity to allege sufficient facts to demonstrate 22 retaliation against the other defendants. (Id. at 2). The Court now finds that Count II, alleging 23 due process violations, shall proceed against Defendants Serrano and Jackson to the extent 24 that Plaintiff is alleging that he was subjected to mental health treatment against his will. (Id. 25 at 3). The Court now finds that Plaintiff’s state law claims may proceed under supplemental 26 jurisdiction. (Id. at 4). 27 Plaintiff is granted leave to file an amended complaint to cure the deficiencies of his 28 retaliation claim. If Plaintiff chooses to file an amended complaint he is advised that an amended complaint supersedes (replaces) the original complaint and, thus, the amended 1 complaint must be complete in itself. See Hal Roach Studios, Inc. v. Richard Feiner & Co., 2 Inc., 896 F.2d 1542, 1546 (9th Cir. 1989) (holding that “[t]he fact that a party was named in the 3 original complaint is irrelevant; an amended pleading supersedes the original”); see also Lacey 4 v. Maricopa Cnty., 693 F.3d 896, 928 (9th Cir. 2012) (holding that for claims dismissed with 5 prejudice, a plaintiff is not required to reallege such claims in a subsequent amended 6 complaint to preserve them for appeal). Plaintiff’s amended complaint must contain all claims, 7 defendants, and factual allegations that Plaintiff wishes to pursue in this lawsuit. Moreover, 8 Plaintiff must file the amended complaint on this Court’s approved prisoner civil rights form and 9 it must be entitled “First Amended Complaint.” 10 The Court notes that if Plaintiff chooses to file an amended complaint curing the 11 deficiencies, as outlined in this order and the Ninth Circuit’s order, Plaintiff shall file the 12 amended complaint within 30 days from the date of entry of this order. If Plaintiff chooses not 13 to file an amended complaint curing the stated deficiencies, Plaintiff must notify the Court 14 within 30 days from the date of this order that he chooses to proceed on Count I against 15 Defendants Jackson and Marikami, Count II against Defendants Serrano and Jackson, and 16 Counts III, IV, V, VI, and VII through supplemental jurisdiction. If Plaintiff does not either file 17 an amended complaint or file a notice informing the Court of his intent to proceed with this 18 case without filing an amended complaint, the Court shall dismiss this case with prejudice. 19 II. CONCLUSION 20 For the foregoing reasons, IT IS ORDERED that the application to proceed in forma 21 pauperis (ECF No. 1) is reinstated. The Court now defers a decision on the application to 22 proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 1). 23 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Plaintiff chooses to file an amended complaint curing 24 the deficiencies of his complaint, as outlined in this order and the Ninth Circuit’s order, Plaintiff 25 shall file the amended complaint within 30 days from the date of entry of this order. 26 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall send to Plaintiff the 27 approved form for filing a § 1983 complaint, instructions for the same, a copy of his original 28 complaint (ECF No. 4), a copy of this Court’s original screening order (ECF No. 3), and a copy 2 1 of the Ninth Circuit’s order (ECF No. 16). If Plaintiff chooses to file an amended complaint, 2 he must use the approved form and he shall write the words “First Amended” above the words 3 “Civil Rights Complaint” in the caption. 4 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Plaintiff chooses not to file an amended complaint, 5 he must file a written notice informing the Court of his intent to proceed with this case without 6 filing an amended complaint. If Plaintiff chooses to file such a notice, this case shall proceed 7 on Count I against Defendants Jackson and Marikami, Count II against Defendants Serrano 8 and Jackson, and Counts III, IV, V, VI, and VII through supplemental jurisdiction. 9 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Plaintiff fails to either file an amended complaint or 10 notify the Court of his intent to proceed with this case within 30 days from the date of this 11 order, the Court shall dismiss this case with prejudice. 12 13 DATED: This _____ day of September, 2016. 16th 14 15 _________________________________ United States District Judge 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?