Sanchez vs. John Doe et al
Filing
17
ORDER entered re 13 Motion to Amend signed by Judge David W. Christel. The Clerk is directed to replace Defendant John Doe Cornwell with Defendant Michael Cornwell. Plaintiff is not required to file an amended complaint. (MET) cc: plaintiff
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA
8
9
10
JOSEPH FLORES SANCHEZ,
11
Plaintiff,
12
13
14
15
v.
JOHN DOE, JOHN DOE,
WASHINGTON STATE
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
JOHN DOE, JANE DOE, MARGARET
GILBERT, JANE 1-3 DOE, DENNIS
CHERRY, JOHN DOE CORNWELL,
CASE NO. 3:16-CV-05201-BHS-DWC
ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMENDED
COMPLAINT
16
Defendants.
17
18
Plaintiff, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this civil rights action pursuant
19
to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See Dkt. 1. Presently before the Court is Plaintiff’s “Motion for Leave to
20
File Amended Complaint” (“Motion”). Dkt. 13. In his Motion, Plaintiff requests Defendant John
21
Doe Cornwell be changed to Michael Cornwell in the heading of his Amended Complaint in
22
order to properly serve Defendant Cornwell. Id. A review of the docket shows, Michael
23
Cornwell returned the waiver of service form mailed to “John Doe Cornwell.” See Dkt. 16.
24
ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE
TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT - 1
1 Therefore, Defendant Michael Cornwell has received a copy of the Amended Complaint and has
2 agreed to waive service.
3
Plaintiff’s Motion is granted as follows: The Clerk is directed to replace Defendant John
4 Doe Cornwell with Defendant Michael Cornwell. As the parties appear to agree the defendant
5 referenced in the Amended Complaint is Defendant Michael Cornwell, Plaintiff is not required to
6 file an amended complaint substituting Michael Cornwell for John Doe Cornwell.
7
Dated this 26th day of May, 2016.
A
8
9
David W. Christel
United States Magistrate Judge
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE
TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT - 2
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?