Edwards v. State of Nevada

Opinion

2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 4 CARL DEAN EDWARDS, Case No. 3:20-cv-00716-ART-CSD 5 Plaintiff, ORDER 6 v.

7 NEVADA, STATE OF, et al.,

8 Defendants.

9 10 Plaintiff Carl Dean Edwards, who is incarcerated in the custody of the 11 Nevada Department of Corrections (“NDOC”), initiated this case with a civil rights 12 complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (ECF No. 1-1.) On July 4, 2021, the 13 Court issued an order screening Plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. 14 (ECF No. 24.) The Court dismissed some of Plaintiff’s claims with prejudice and 15 dismissed other claims without prejudice and with leave to file an amended 16 complaint by August 9, 2021. (Id. at 9-10.) 17 Plaintiff appealed the screening order, and his appeal was denied for lack 18 of jurisdiction. (ECF Nos. 26, 33.) In the interim, Plaintiff filed a second civil 19 rights complaint that included only a cover letter and 26 pages of exhibits. (ECF 20 No. 28.) The Court did not accept this incomplete complaint and gave Plaintiff 21 an extension to file to file a complete amended complaint by November 30, 2021. 22 (ECF No. 24.) 23 On November 12, 2021, Plaintiff filed an amended complaint. (ECF No. 24 41.) The amended complaint contained only a very brief summary of Plaintiff’s 25 claims and directed the Court to Plaintiff’s other filings for details on his claims 26 and factual allegations. (Id. at 4-6.) On December 9, 2021, The Court dismissed 27 the amended complaint without prejudice and with leave to amend because the 28 amended complaint did not contain any specific claims or factual allegations 1 about any of the Defendants. (ECF No. 44.) The Court explained that in any 2 second amended complaint Plaintiff must state the facts and his claims in the 3 body of the complaint and that failure to do so could result in dismissal of this 4 action. (Id.) The Court gave Plaintiff until January 14, 2022, to file a second 5 amended complaint. (Id. at 3.) 6 On December 13, 2021, Plaintiff filed a document entitled First Amended 7 complaint. (ECF No. 45.) This document does not contain any factual 8 allegations, but simply refers to Plaintiff’s prior pleadings. (Id.) The document is 9 dated November 20, 2021, before the Court’s order dismissing his amended 10 complaint. (Id. at 9.) As such, it appears that Plaintiff prepared this document 11 prior to receiving the Court’s order. 12 On December 29, 2021, Plaintiff refiled the amended complaint that he had 13 previously filed on November 12, and which the Court had dismissed in its 14 December 9, 2021, screening order. (ECF No. 47.) On January 13, 2022, Plaintiff 15 filed a motion for an extension until February 14, 2022, to file a second amended 16 complaint. (ECF No. 52.) On March 7, 2022, Plaintiff filed a second appeal of 17 the Court’s initial screening order, and this appeal was denied. (ECF Nos. 58, 18 63.) 20 The Court does not accept Plaintiff’s duplicative amended complaint filed 21 at ECF No. 47 as a second amended complaint. It is an exact duplicate of the 22 amended complaint that Plaintiff had already filed and which the Court dismissed 23 for failure to state a claim. To the extent that it can be considered a second 24 amended complaint, it fails to state any colorable claims, for the reasons 25 discussed in the Court’s previous screening order. 26 In light of Plaintiff’s pro se status, the Court will grant Plaintiff one final 27 opportunity to file a complete second amended complaint. As the Court has 28 previously explained, a second amended complaint supersedes (replaces) the 1 original complaint, and any previous amended complaints and, thus, the second 2 amended complaint must be complete in itself. See Hal Roach Studios, Inc. v. 3 Richard Feiner & Co., Inc., 896 F.2d 1542, 1546 (9th Cir. 1989) (holding that “[t]he 4 fact that a party was named in the original complaint is irrelevant; an amended 5 pleading supersedes the original”); see also Lacey v. Maricopa Cnty., 693 F.3d 6 896, 928 (9th Cir. 2012) (holding that for claims dismissed with prejudice, a 7 plaintiff is not required to reallege such claims in a subsequent amended 8 complaint to preserve them for appeal). Any second amended complaint must 9 contain all claims, defendants, and factual allegations that Plaintiff wishes to 10 pursue in this lawsuit. Moreover, Plaintiff should file the second amended 11 complaint on this Court’s approved prisoner civil rights form and it must be 12 entitled “Second Amended Complaint.” 13 For Plaintiff’s benefit, the Court also notes that the District of Nevada 14 issued General Order No. 2021-05, which applies to pro se civil rights complaints 15 filed by inmates. It states “the complaint or any amended complaint must 16 sufficiently state the facts and claims without reference to exhibits or affidavits. 17 Failure to state the facts and claims within the body of the complaint or amended 18 complaint, without reference to any attached exhibits or affidavits, may result in 19 dismissal.” General Order No. 2021-05, also states that complaints or amended 20 complaints may not exceed 30 pages. If a plaintiff believes that he needs more 21 than 30 pages, he must file a motion seeking permission to exceed the page limit, 22 and the motion itself may not exceed 3 pages. Motions to exceed the page limit 23 are looked upon with disfavor and will not be routinely granted. 24 If Plaintiff chooses to file a second amended complaint, Plaintiff will file the 25 second amended complaint within 30 days from the date of entry of this order. If 26 Plaintiff chooses not to file a second amended complaint this case will be 27 dismissed for failure to state a claim. 28 /// 1} IL CASE NUMBER 2 The Court notes that this case was reassigned to the undersigned Judge 3 || on April 13, 2022. (ECF No. 61.) As such, the case number was changed to 4 || 3:20cv00716-ART-CSD. (/d.) After that Plaintiff began refusing to accept mail 5 || from the Court on the grounds that it contained the wrong case number, and he 6 || filed a notice stating that he refuses to agree to the new case number because it 7 || would be confusing to him. (ECF No. 67.) The case number has been changed 8 || to reflect that this case was reassigned to the undersigned. As explained in the 9 || notice from the Clerk of the Court, all future documents must bear the correct 10 || case number, to 3:20cv00716-ART-CSD. (ECF No. 61.) 11 Iil. CONCLUSION 12 For the foregoing reasons, it is ordered that if Plaintiff chooses to file a 13 || second amended complaint, Plaintiff will file the second amended complaint 14 || within 30 days from the date of entry of this order. 15 It is further ordered that the Clerk of the Court will send to Plaintiff the 16 || approved form for filing a § 1983 complaint and instructions for the same. If 17 || Plaintiff chooses to file a second amended complaint, he should use the approved 18 || form and he will write the words “Second Amended” above the words “Civil Rights 19 || Complaint” in the caption. 20 It is further ordered that, if Plaintiff chooses not to file an amended 21 || complaint curing the stated deficiencies of the complaint, this action will be 22 || dismissed for failure to state a claim. 23 24 DATED THIS 9th day of June 2022. 25 Aras poset id 27 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 28