1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 DAVID BENNETT, 11 Case No. 19-08166 BLF (PR) Plaintiff, 12 ORDER LIFTING STAY; DENYING v. MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF 13 GUARDIAN AD LITEM; DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO FILE 14 PROP. 47 PUBLIC DEFENDER, et al., AMENDED COMPLAINT 15 Defendants. 16 (Docket No. 15)

17 18 Plaintiff, a California inmate, filed the instant pro se civil rights action pursuant to 19

, seeking money damages for unlawful confinement. Dkt. No. 1. The 20 Court referred this matter to the Federal Pro Se Program to find counsel for the limited 21 purpose of conducting a competency hearing because there was a substantial questions 22 regarding his mental incompetence based on an order from the Superior Court of Butte 23 County finding him incompetent to stand trial. Dkt. No. 16. The Court found this 24 document triggered its duty was inquiry under Rule 17(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil 25 Procedure.

26 It has come to the Court’s attention that Plaintiff’s criminal proceedings in Butte 27 County Superior Court have been reinstated by a minute order dated December 23, 2020, 1 after a mental competence hearing. See In the Matter of David Hill Bennett, Case No. 2 20CF01767-1.1 The fact that criminal proceedings are reinstated indicates that Plaintiff 3 has been restored to competency. Accordingly, the Court finds there is no longer a 4 substantial question regarding Plaintiff’s competency, and therefore no need to hold a 5 hearing in that regard. Therefore, the referral to the Federal Pro Se Program is hereby 6 withdrawn. Plaintiff’s motion for appointment of conservator/guardian ad litem is 7 DENIED. Plaintiff shall continue in pro se in this matter and file an amended complaint in 8 the time set forth below. 9 10 CONCLUSION 11 For the reasons state above, the Court orders as follows: 12 1. Within forty-five (45) days from the date this order is filed, Plaintiff shall 13 file an amended complaint using the court’s form complaint to attempt to remedy the 14 deficiencies discussed in the Court’s Order of Dismissal with Leave to Amend. Dkt. No. 15 7. The amended complaint must include the caption and civil case number used in this 16 order, i.e., Case No. C 19-08166 BLF (PR), and the words “AMENDED COMPLAINT” 17 on the first page. Plaintiff must answer all the questions on the form in order for the action 18 to proceed. Plaintiff is reminded that the amended complaint supersedes the original, and 19 Plaintiff may not make references to the original complaint. Claims not included in the 20 amended complaint are no longer claims and defendants not named in an amended 21 complaint are no longer defendants. See Ferdik v. Bonzelet,

(9th 22 Cir. 1992). 23 Failure to respond in accordance with this order by filing an amended 24 complaint in accordance with the above in the time provided will result in the 25

26 1 The docket for Mr. Bennett’s criminal proceedings can be found at the website for the 1 || dismissal of this action without prejudice and without further notice to Plaintiff. 2 2. The Clerk shall include two court form complaints and a copy of the Court’s 3 || Order of Dismissal with Leave to Amend, Dkt. No. 7, along with a copy of this order to 4 || Plaintiff. 5 The stay of this matter is hereby LIFTED. 6 IT IS SO ORDERED 7 || Dated: _January 26, 2021 ke aM Lye □ Sid □ BETH LABSON FREEMAN United States District Judge 9 10 11 12

2B

15

Q 16

Z 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Order Lifting Stay; Deny Appt; Am. Compl. Due PRO-SE\BLF\CR.19\08166Bennett_deny .atty&ACdue 26 27