Sanders v. Hicks

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA PHILLIP SANDERS, Case No. 1:22-cv-00577-JLT-HBK 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DISCHARGING SHOW CAUSE ORDER 13 v. ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION SHERIFF ROBERT HICKS, ET AL, TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT AND DIRECTING CLERK TO CORRECT 15 Defendants. DOCKET 16 (Doc. Nos. 9, 10) 19 On April 25, 2023, the Court issued to pro se Plaintiff an order to show cause why the Court should not dismiss this action as barred by the two-year statute of limitations and for lack of jurisdiction. (Doc. No. 8). In response, pro se Plaintiff filed a motion to amend his complaint and a First Amended Complaint on May 26, 2023. (Doc. Nos. 9, 10).

23 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15 permits, inter alia, a party as a right to file an amended complaint before a defendant is served and responds. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1)(A). Also, a pro se litigant is entitled to an opportunity to amend their complaint before dismissal of the action. See Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1127-29 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc).

27 The Court grants the motion and deems the First Amended Complaint the operative pleading. (Doc. No. 10). The Court will discharge the show cause order and review Plaintiff’s | First Amended Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) -ii) before directing service on || any defendant.

3 Accordingly, it is ORDERED: 4 1. Plaintiff's motion to amend (Doc. No. 9) is GRANTED and Plaintiff First Amended 5 Complaint (Doc. No. 10) is deemed the operative pleading.

6 2. The Court discharges the order to show cause issued on April 25, 2023 (Doc. No. 8).

7 3. The Clerk shall correct the docket to reflect only the names of the defendants 8 identified in Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 10). | Dated: _ June 10, 2023 Mihaw. Wh. arch Yack 11 HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE