(PC) Alexander-Campos v. Bruce

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ROBERT J. ALEXANDER-CAMPOS, III, Case No. 1:22-cv-00958-JLT-CDB (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER WITHDRAWING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 13 v. (Doc. 18) BRUCE, et al., 15 Defendants.

17 Plaintiff Robert J. Alexander-Campos was a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.1 On June 6, 2022, Plaintiff initiated this action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.

20 (Doc. 1.) The District Court screened the complaint and dismissed the complaint with leave to amend. (Doc. 6 at 2.) The court advised: “Because an amended complaint completely replaces the original complaint, plaintiff must include in it all the claims he wishes to present. . . . He may not incorporate material from the original complaint by reference.” (Id. at 2–3) (citing Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1262 (9th Cir. 1992)).

25 On July 28, 2022, Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint asserting the use of excessive force when he was a prisoner at Pleasant Valley State Prison (“PVSP”). (Doc. 7.) Because venue At the time of filing, Plaintiff was a detainee held at Alameda County Santa Rita Jail in Dublin, | lies in the Eastern District of California, the presiding District Judge in the Northern District | transferred the case to this Court. (Doc. 9.)

3 On September 15, 2023, the Court screened the first amended complaint and found it | failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. (Doc. 17.) The Court granted Plaintiff | leave to file a second amended complaint and directed Plaintiff within twenty-one days to file | either an amended complaint, a notice of desire to stand on his complaint, or notice of dismissal | Ud. at 7-8).

8 On October 16, 2023, having not received any filings from Plaintiff responsive to the | screening order, the undersigned entered findings and recommendations to dismiss this action | with prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and failure to obey a 11 court order. (Doc. 18.) Unbeknownst to the undersigned at the time, the Clerk of the Court was | in receipt of a second amended complaint, which now has been filed. (See Doc. 19.)

13 In light of Plaintiffs filing of a second amended complaint, it is HEREBY ORDERED | that the Court’s findings and recommendations of September 15, 2023, (Doc. 17), are | WITHDRAWN.

16 The Court acknowledges Plaintiffs filing of a second amended complaint on October 17, |} 2023 (Doc. 19) and that it screens complaints in the order in which they are filed and strives to | avoid delays whenever possible. However, there are hundreds of prisoner civil rights cases | presently pending before this Court, and delays are inevitable despite the Court’s best efforts.

20 | □□ □□ SO ORDERED. | Dated: _ October 17, 2023 | Wr Pr 22 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE