Ramos

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SCOTT KEITH ERNST, No. 2:21-cv-813 DAD AC P Plaintiff, v. ORDER DAVID FRANCES RAMOS, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, seeks relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. I. Procedural History After filing the original complaint, plaintiff proceeded to file numerous documents that he identified as supplements to the complaint. ECF Nos. 9-12, 16, 19-20. However, because the additional allegations contained in these documents largely addressed events that occurred prior to the filing of the complaint rather than after filing, the supplements were construed as motions to amend the complaint. See ECF No. 21 at 2. Because plaintiff was still within the time for amending the complaint as a matter of course, the motions to amend were denied as unnecessary. Id. Plaintiff was given an opportunity to file an amended complaint and advised that the amended complaint “must be set forth in…