Young v. Valenzuela

4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA KENRY LEE YOUNG, Case No. 22-cv-02350-WHO (PR) Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF v. 9 TO FILE A RESPONSE TO THIS ORDER BY OCTOBER 10, 2022 10 E. VALENZUELA, Defendant.

13 Plaintiff Young filed a complaint, then filed a motion for leave to file an amended complaint, which I granted. (Dkt. Nos. 1 and 4.) The original complaint was dismissed and Young was ordered to file an amended complaint by August 1, 2022. (Dkt. No. 4 at 1.) That date has passed and no amended complaint has been filed.

17 On or before October 10, 2022, Young shall file a written response to this order.

18 This response shall be either (i) a written statement indicating that he wishes the original complaint to be reinstated and serve as the operative complaint in this suit; or (ii) an amended complaint. No extensions of time will be granted. Failure to file a proper response to this order may result in the dismissal of this action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute.

23 If Young chooses to file an amended complaint he is reminded of the following.

24 The amended complaint must appear on this Court’s form, a copy of which will be sent to him. The amended complaint must include the caption and civil case number used in this order (22-02350 WHO (PR)) and the words FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT must appear on the first page. Because an amended complaint completely replaces the previous |} present and all of the defendants he wishes to sue. See Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, || 1262 (9th Cir. 1992). Plaintiff may not incorporate material from a prior complaint by || reference.

4 IT IS SO ORDERED. .

5 || Dated: September 1, 2022 \f CE ® 6 LLIAM H. ORRICK 7 United States District Judge qa 12

©

Z 18