1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 THOMAS DORSEY, 1:24-cv-00383-SKO (PC) 12 Plaintiff,

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S

13 v. REQUEST FILED DECEMBER 3, 2024

14 DONNY YOUNGBLOOD, et al., (Doc. 14)

15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Thomas Dorsey is a county jail inmate proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis 18 in a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. section § 1983. 19 I. INTRODUCTION 20 Plaintiff filed his original complaint on April 2, 2024. (Doc. 1.) On September 17, 2024, 21 the Court issued its First Screening Order. (Doc. 11.) The Court found that Plaintiff’s complaint 22 violated Rules 18 and 20 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and granted Plaintiff 21 days 23 within which to file a first amended complaint, curing the deficiencies identified by the Court, or 24 to file a notice of voluntary dismissal. (Id. at 4-16.) On October 10, 2024, 25 Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint. (Doc. 12.) 26 On December 3, 2024, Plaintiff filed a document titled “Request for An Addendum to 27 First Amended Complaint.” (Doc. 14.) 28 For the reasons discussed below, Plaintiff’s request will be denied. 1 II. DISCUSSION 2 Plaintiff seeks to add facts for “clarity to claim(s) already raised” in his first amended 3 complaint. (Doc. 14.) As Plaintiff was previously advised in the Court’s First Screening Order, 4 “an amended complaint must be ‘complete in itself without reference to the prior or superseded 5 pleading.’ Local Rule 220.” (Doc. 11 at 15.) Plaintiff may not add facts to his first amended 6 complaint by way of a separate “addendum.” All claims must be presented in a single pleading. 7 Plaintiff will be given the opportunity to file a second amended complaint and to add facts 8 he believes are relevant to his claims. Plaintiff must be mindful of the Court’s First Screening 9 Order and its discussion and analysis to ensure any second amended complaint complies with the 10 relevant screening and pleading requirements, particularly Rules 18 and 20 of the Federal Rules 11 of Civil Procedure. 12 Plaintiff is reminded that “an amended complaint supersedes the original complaint. Lacey 13 v. Maricopa Cty., 693 F.3d 896, 927 (9th Cir. 2012).” (See Doc. 11 at 15.) Thus, any second 14 amended complaint must be complete in and of itself without reference to any prior complaint or 15 pleading. 16 Plaintiff is also reminded that prisoner civil rights complaints must be screened pursuant 17 to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). Plaintiff’s first amended complaint is currently pending screening. 18 Should Plaintiff elect to file a second amended complaint, the Court will disregard the first 19 amended complaint and will screen the second amended complaint in due course. In the event 20 Plaintiff elects not to file a second amended complaint, the previously filed first amended 21 complaint will be screened in due course. After the Court has determined that Plaintiff has 22 asserted cognizable claims, the Court move on to service of any operative complaint. 23 III. CONCLUSION 24 Based on the foregoing, the Court ORDERS as follows: 25 1. Plaintiff’s request to file an addendum to his first amended complaint (Doc. 14) is 26 DENIED; 27 2. If Plaintiff elects to file a second amended complaint, he SHALL do so within 30 28 days of the date of service of this order. Any second amended complaint must be 1 complete in and of itself; and 2 3. If Plaintiff chooses not to file a second amended complaint, the Court will screen 3 Plaintiff’s first amended complaint in due course. 4

IT IS SO ORDERED.

5 6 Dated: December 5, 2024 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto .

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

7

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28