From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Harrell v. Palmer

United States District Court, E.D. California
Oct 10, 2008
No. CIV S-04-1968 JAM DAD P (E.D. Cal. Oct. 10, 2008)

Opinion

No. CIV S-04-1968 JAM DAD P.

October 10, 2008


ORDER


Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, has filed a second amended complaint. Plaintiff is advised that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide that a party may amend his or her pleading "once as a matter of course at any time before a responsive pleading is served." Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a). In all other instances, "a party may amend its pleading only with the opposing party's written consent or the court's leave." Here, plaintiff has not obtained defendant's written consent or the court's leave. Accordingly, plaintiff's second amended complaint will be stricken.

Plaintiff has also filed a request to amend or supplement his opposition to defendant's motion to dismiss, together with a request for an extension of time to file an amended or supplemental opposition. Plaintiff is advised that defendants' motion to dismiss was deemed submitted for decision when defendants filed a reply. See Local Rule 78-230(m). A response to defendants' reply is neither proper nor necessary. Accordingly, plaintiff's requests will be denied.

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

1. Plaintiff's September 16, 2008 second amended complaint (Doc. No. 25) is stricken; and

2. Plaintiff's October 3, 2008 requests (Doc. No. 27) are denied.


Summaries of

Harrell v. Palmer

United States District Court, E.D. California
Oct 10, 2008
No. CIV S-04-1968 JAM DAD P (E.D. Cal. Oct. 10, 2008)
Case details for

Harrell v. Palmer

Case Details

Full title:HULEN T. HARRELL, Plaintiff, v. P.D. PALMER, et al., Defendants

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

Date published: Oct 10, 2008

Citations

No. CIV S-04-1968 JAM DAD P (E.D. Cal. Oct. 10, 2008)