(PC) KasenzangaKhona v. Cano

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SHAKAZULU SIGIDI Case No.: 1:23-cv-001764-JLT-SKO KASENZANGAKHONA, 12 ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S Plaintiff, FILING OF MARCH 27, 2024 13 v. (Doc. 16) 14 L. CANO, et al., 15 Defendants.

17 18 Plaintiff Shakazulu Sigidi KasenzangaKhona is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis 19 in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 20 I. INTRODUCTION 21 Plaintiff filed his complaint on December 26, 2023. (Doc. 1.) On January 22, 2024, 22 Plaintiff filed a “Writ of Mandate.” (Doc. 10.) 23 On March 12, 2024, the Court issued its First Screening Order. (Doc. 12.) The Court 24 found Plaintiff’s original complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. (Id. at 25 4-12.) Plaintiff was granted leave to file an amended complaint within 21 days, curing the 26 deficiencies identified in the complaint. (Id. at 13-14.) On March 12, 2024, the Court also issued 27 Findings and Recommendations to Deny Plaintiff’s Request For Injunctive Relief. (Doc. 14.) 1 On March 18, 2024, Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint. (Doc. 15.) On March 27, 2 2024, Plaintiff filed a document titled “Objections to Magistrates Judges Findings and 3 Recommendations Including State Writ of Habeas Corpus.” (Doc. 16.) 4 II. DISCUSSION 5 A review of Plaintiff’s March 27, 2024, filing reveals that it is another amended complaint 6 and not objections to the Findings and Recommendations. Plaintiff’s previously filed amended 7 complaint was dated and signed March 14, 2024, and the most recent submission is dated and 8 signed March 26, 2024. (Cf. Doc. 15 to Doc. 16.) Because Plaintiff would not have received the 9 Court’s March 12, 2024 screening order before preparing and submitting the March 18, 2024, 10 amended complaint, that amended complaint is not responsive to the screening order. The Court 11 will direct the Clerk of the Court to strike the first amended complaint filed March 18, 2024, and 12 to modify the docket entry dated March 27, 2024, to reflect the filing of a first amended 13 complaint. The first amended complaint filed March 27, 2024, will be screened in due course. 14 Out of an abundance of caution, the Court will grant Plaintiff another 14 days within 15 which to submit any objections to the Findings and Recommendations issued March 12, 2024. 16 (Doc. 14.) The Findings concern Plaintiff’s “Writ of Mandate,” and are construed to be a request 17 for injunctive relief. (Id. at 3.) To the extent Plaintiff intends to file objections to the Court’s 18 Findings, those objections should be responsive to the applicability of Winter v. Nat. Res. Def. 19 Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 20 (2008) as applied to Plaintiff’s request and the Court’s 20 recommendation that injunctive relief be denied. Any objections filed by Plaintiff will be 21 reviewed by District Judge Jennifer L. Thurston. 22 III. CONCLUSION AND ORDER 23 For the reasons given above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 24 1. The first amended complaint filed March 18, 2024 (Doc. 15) is STRICKEN; 25 2. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to modify the March 27, 2024 docket entry 26 (Doc. 16) to reflect the filing of a first amended complaint. The amended complaint 27 will be screened in due course; and 1 issued March 12, 2024, within 14 days of the date of service of this order. The 2 document should be captioned, “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and 3 Recommendations.” 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5

6 Dated: April 2, 2024 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto . UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 7

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27