(PC)Wilson v. Ortega

E.D. California

(PC)Wilson v. Ortega

DecidedJanuary 23, 2023

Docket2:21-cv-00314

StatusUnknown

This text of (PC)Wilson v. Ortega ((PC)Wilson v. Ortega) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

(PC)Wilson v. Ortega, (E.D. Cal. 2023).

Pincite

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ELROYAL JEROME WILSON, No. 2:21-cv-0314 KJM AC P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 J. ORTEGA, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding through counsel, has filed a second amended 18 complaint. ECF No. 55. 19 Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15, a plaintiff may amend the complaint once as a 20 matter of course within “(A) 21 days after serving it, or (B) if the pleading is one to which a 21 responsive pleading is required, 21 days after service of a responsive pleading or 21 days after 22 service of a motion under Rule 12(b), (e), or (f), whichever is earlier.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1). 23 “In all other cases, a party may amend its pleading only with the opposing party’s written consent 24 or the court’s leave.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). 25 Plaintiff indicates that he is amending “as a matter of course.” ECF No. 55 at 1 n.1. 26 However, plaintiff already amended the complaint as a matter of course prior to screening by the 27 court. See ECF No. 7; United States ex rel. D’Agostino v. EV3, Inc., 802 F.3d 188, 193 (1st Cir. 28 2015) (the time to amend begins when plaintiff files his complaint, “the word ‘within’ merely 1 | specifies the point at which the right expires”). Since plaintiff has already amended once as a 2 || matter of course, he must first obtain defendants’ consent or leave of the court before amending 3 || again. The second amended complaint will therefore be stricken from the record and the parties 4 | remain obligated to file a joint status report as previously ordered. See ECF No. 54. 5 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to strike 6 || plaintiffs unauthorized second amended complaint (ECF No. 55) from the record. 7 | DATED: January 20, 2023 ~ 8 Hthren— Lhor—e_ ALLISON CLAIRE 9 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ELROYAL JEROME WILSON, No. 2:21-cv-0314 KJM AC P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 J. ORTEGA, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding through counsel, has filed a second amended 18 complaint. ECF No. 55. 19 Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15, a plaintiff may amend the complaint once as a 20 matter of course within “(A) 21 days after serving it, or (B) if the pleading is one to which a 21 responsive pleading is required, 21 days after service of a responsive pleading or 21 days after 22 service of a motion under Rule 12(b), (e), or (f), whichever is earlier.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1). 23 “In all other cases, a party may amend its pleading only with the opposing party’s written consent 24 or the court’s leave.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). 25 Plaintiff indicates that he is amending “as a matter of course.” ECF No. 55 at 1 n.1. 26 However, plaintiff already amended the complaint as a matter of course prior to screening by the 27 court. See ECF No. 7; United States ex rel. D’Agostino v. EV3, Inc., 802 F.3d 188, 193 (1st Cir. 28 2015) (the time to amend begins when plaintiff files his complaint, “the word ‘within’ merely 1 | specifies the point at which the right expires”). Since plaintiff has already amended once as a 2 || matter of course, he must first obtain defendants’ consent or leave of the court before amending 3 || again. The second amended complaint will therefore be stricken from the record and the parties 4 | remain obligated to file a joint status report as previously ordered. See ECF No. 54. 5 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to strike 6 || plaintiffs unauthorized second amended complaint (ECF No. 55) from the record. 7 | DATED: January 20, 2023 ~ 8 Hthren— Lhor—e_ ALLISON CLAIRE 9 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

(PC)Wilson v. Ortega, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pcwilson-v-ortega-caed-2023.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack