From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bjorlin v. Masdeo

United States District Court, E.D. California
Feb 23, 2006
No. CIV S-05-1741 MCE PAN P (E.D. Cal. Feb. 23, 2006)

Opinion

No. CIV S-05-1741 MCE PAN P.

February 23, 2006


ORDER


Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. By order filed December 27, 2005, plaintiff's complaint was dismissed and plaintiff was granted forty-five days leave to file an amended complaint. On December 30, 2005, plaintiff filed a document entitled "Notice of Citizens' Complaint Against Personnel." This document does not comport with the requirements of the court's December 27, 2005 order. Good cause appearing, plaintiff will be granted an extension of time in which to file an amended complaint that complies with that order.

Plaintiff must demonstrate how the conditions complained of have resulted in a deprivation of plaintiff's constitutional rights. See Ellis v. Cassidy, 625 F.2d 227 (9th Cir. 1980). Also, the complaint must allege in specific terms how each named defendant is involved. There can be no liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 unless there is some affirmative link or connection between a defendant's actions and the claimed deprivation. Rizzo v. Goode, 423 U.S. 362 (1976); May v. Enomoto, 633 F.2d 164, 167 (9th Cir. 1980); Johnson v. Duffy, 588 F.2d 740, 743 (9th Cir. 1978). Furthermore, vague and conclusory allegations of official participation in civil rights violations are not sufficient. Ivey v. Board of Regents, 673 F.2d 266, 268 (9th Cir. 1982).

In addition, plaintiff is informed that the court cannot refer to a prior pleading in order to make plaintiff's amended complaint complete. Local Rule 15-220 requires that an amended complaint be complete in itself without reference to any prior pleading. This is because, as a general rule, an amended complaint supersedes the original complaint. See Loux v. Rhay, 375 F.2d 55, 57 (9th Cir. 1967). Once plaintiff files an amended complaint, the original pleading no longer serves any function in the case. Therefore, in an amended complaint, as in an original complaint, each claim and the involvement of each defendant must be sufficiently alleged.

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's December 30, 2005 notice will be placed in the file and disregarded;

2. Plaintiff is granted thirty days from the date of service of this order to file an amended complaint that complies with the court's December 27, 2005 order, the requirements of the Civil Rights Act, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the Local Rules of Practice; the amended complaint must bear the docket number assigned this case and must be labeled "Amended Complaint"; plaintiff must file an original and two copies of the amended complaint; failure to file an amended complaint in accordance with this order will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed.

3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send plaintiff the form for filing a civil rights complaint.


Summaries of

Bjorlin v. Masdeo

United States District Court, E.D. California
Feb 23, 2006
No. CIV S-05-1741 MCE PAN P (E.D. Cal. Feb. 23, 2006)
Case details for

Bjorlin v. Masdeo

Case Details

Full title:DANIEL BJORLIN, Plaintiff, v. MASDEO, Defendant

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Feb 23, 2006

Citations

No. CIV S-05-1741 MCE PAN P (E.D. Cal. Feb. 23, 2006)