Opinion
21cv1427-LL-AGS
03-21-2022
ELOY MASCORRO, Plaintiff, v. THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO; PARK RANGER JOHN DOE; SAN DIEGO POLICE DEPARTMENT OFFICERS 1-4; THE SAN DIEGO FIRE DEPARTMENT; EMTS 1-3, Defendants.
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT BY EMAIL
[ECF NO. 22]
HONORABLE LINDA LOPEZ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
On March 14, 2021, Plaintiff, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, moved the Court ex parte “to allow me to file a new complaint by email, or crated an alternative for me to enter the building . . . . so that I can file in person and enter without a Government ID.” ECF No. 22. Plaintiff states that he was “informed by the Clerk's office that a new complaint can only be filed by mail or in person and so [I] can not use my current PACER account. Id. at 1. Here, however, Plaintiff does not seek to file a “new complaint.” Rather, he seeks to file an amended complaint “to properly name each defendant.” See ECF No. 21. Plaintiff has been granted permission to file documents and receive notifications using the Court's CM/ECF system without charge and in accordance with ECF Administrative Policies and Procedures. ECF No. 8 at 6-7. It is not clear that Plaintiff is unable to file, or will be unable to file, an amended complaint using the CM/ECF system. Accordingly, Plaintiffs motion [ECF No. 22] is DENIED without prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.