DePonte v. Bierman

Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 DAVID ARTHUR DEPONTE, Case No. 23-cv-03813-LJC

8 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF 9 v. EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 10 MIRNA BIERMAN, et al., Re: Dkt. Nos. 38, 39 Defendants. 11

12 13 On February 9, 2024, the Court dismissed plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint and 14 granted him leave to file a Second Amended Complaint by March 8, 2024. ECF 35. On March 1, 15 plaintiff filed a “Motion for Permissive Joinder” describing retaliation that he has experienced 16 since filing his lawsuit. ECF 38. On March 6, plaintiff filed a “Motion for Leave to File an 17 Amended Complaint.” ECF 39. The Court construes plaintiff’s March 6 motion as a request for 18 an extension of time to file his Second Amended Complaint and grants the motion. 19 Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint is due by April 15, 2024, and must include the 20 caption and civil case number used in this order, 23-cv-03813-LJC, and the words “SECOND 21 AMENDED COMPLAINT” on the first page. Because an amended complaint completely 22 replaces the original complaint, plaintiff must include in it all the claims he wishes to present. 23 See Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1262 (9th Cir. 1992). Plaintiff may not incorporate 24 material from the original Complaint by reference. He should explain the facts to the Court as 25 though it is his first time doing so. Failure to amend by April 15, 2024 will result in dismissal of 26 this case. 27 As for plaintiff’s request for joinder, he may include in his Second Amended Complaint 1 || join other defendants “if any right to relief is asserted against them jointly, severally, or in the 2 alternative with respect to or arising out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of 3 transactions or occurrences; and any question of law or fact common to all defendants will arise in 4 || the action.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 20(a)(2). Plaintiff should not join unrelated claims against different 5 || defendants. Plaintiffs claims of retaliation for filing this lawsuit are sufficiently related to the 6 || underlying claims in this lawsuit that he may include them. 7 This Order terminates ECF 38 and 39. 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. 9 || Dated: March 18, 2024 10 11 Mn, | Aer LIS ISN S 12 United/States Magistrate Judge

15 16

= 17

Z 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28