Opinion
No. CIV S-11-1508 JAM GGH P.
September 13, 2011
ORDER
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se. He seeks relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed an amended complaint on August 3, 2011, and defendants filed an answer and a motion to dismiss on August 17, 2011. However, the amended complaint did contain cognizable claims and the court issued a screening order dismissing the complaint with leave to amend. Therefore, the motion to dismiss is vacated, but may be re-noticed if plaintiff files a second amended complaint.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendants' August 17, 2011, motion to dismiss (Doc. 16) is vacated but may be re-noticed if plaintiff files a second amended complaint.