(PC) Madrid v. Anglea

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ALEJANDRO MADRID, Case No. 1:19-cv-00894-HBK (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION 13 v. (Doc. No. 19) H. ANGELA; JACK ST. CLAIRE; GRACE SENG; ERIC MARVEL; JUSTINE TUDOR; STEVEN SMITH; FNU DOWBAK, Defendants.

18 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s “request attachment to Exhibit (C)” construed as a motion under Fed. R. Civ. P. 15, filed on June 22, 2020. (Doc. No. 19). Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this rights action filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff’s second amended complaint is before the court for screening. (Doc. No. 17, “SAC”).

22 Plaintiff requests to attach and incorporate by reference various exhibits to his SAC exhibits, specifically 18 typewritten pages. (Id.). Inter alia, these pages contain the job descriptions for a warden and the biography of Secretary of the CDCR Ralph Diaz. The exhibits are not indexed or specifically referenced in the SAC. Some of the exhibits contain Plaintiff’s handwritten notes or portions of certain documents are circled, underlined or contain arrows pointing to specific parts of the document. (See generally id.).

28 Rule 15 permits one amendment as a matter of course, but in all other cases Court leave | must be granted, or with the opposing party’s written consent. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15. Rule | 15(a)(1)(b) requires a complaint be a free-standing document and include all exhibits attached | thereto. Rule 15(d) governs supplemental pleadings and provides that the Court may permit | supplemental pleadings to set forth any transaction, occurrence, or event that happened after the | date of the pleading to be supplemented.

6 To the extent Plaintiff seeks to incorporate these papers as exhibits to his SAC, the motion | is denied. The SAC already attaches nearly 300 pages of exhibits. As noted above, the | documents Plaintiff subsequently seeks to attach are not refenced in his SAC and consist of job | descriptions or other general information concerning the roles of warden and Secretary of the | CDCR. This information is superfluous or extraneous and not pertinent to prosecution of the | case. See e.g. Fairfield v. Khoo, 1:19-cv-00632-DAD-HBK, 2021 WL 1178261, *1-*2 (E.D.

12 | Cal. March 29, 2021) (granting motion to strike unrelated exhibits in response to motion for || summary judgment). The motion neither constitutes a Rule 15(d) request to supplement and | violates Rule 15(a)(1)(b). Further, the Court does not accept piecemeal pleading and/or | reassemble a litigant’s pleadings.

16 Accordingly, it is ORDERED: 17 Plaintiff's motion (Doc. No. 19) is DENIED. | Dated: _ June 7. 2022 law Nh. fareh Base □□□ 20 HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE