(PC)Wilson

(PC)Wilson v. Ortega

Bad Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJanuary 23, 20232:21-cv-00314California368 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ELROYAL JEROME WILSON, No. 2:21-cv-0314 KJM AC P Plaintiff, v. ORDER J. ORTEGA, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding through counsel, has filed a second amended complaint. ECF No. 55. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15, a plaintiff may amend the complaint once as a matter of course within “(A) 21 days after serving it, or (B) if the pleading is one to which a responsive pleading is required, 21 days after service of a responsive pleading or 21 days after service of a motion under Rule 12(b), (e), or (f), whichever is earlier.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1). “In all other cases, a party may amend its pleading only with the opposing party’s written consent or the court’s leave.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). Plaintiff indicates that he is amending “as a matter of course.” ECF No. 55 at 1 n.1. However, plaintiff already amended the complaint as a matter of course prior to screening by the 27 …

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.