(PC) Springs v. United States

5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ERIC LEBRON SPRINGS, Case No. 1:23-cv-01493-CDB (PC) 9 Plaintiff, ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AN AMENDED 10 v. COMPLAINT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR CONSIDERATION TO SCREEN 12 Defendant. COMPLAINT 13 (Docs. 14, 19, 20)

16 Plaintiff Eric Lebron Springs is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action. (Doc. 1). Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file an amended complaint and for screening within 60 days. (Docs. 18, 19).

19 I. Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend 20 Pursuant to Rule 15(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a party may amend a pleading once as a matter of course before a responsive pleading is served. Otherwise, a party may amend only by leave of the court or by written consent of the adverse party. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a). “Rule 15(a) is very liberal and leave to amend shall be given freely when justice so requires.” AmerisourceBergen Corp. v. Dialysist West, Inc., 465 F.3d 946, 951 (9th Cir. 2006) (citation and quotation omitted). The district court may deny a motion to amend where the amendment: (1) prejudices the opposing party; (2) is sought in bad faith; (3) produces an undue delay in litigation; or (4) is futile. Bowles v. Reade, 198 F.3d 752, 757-58 (9th Cir. 1999).

Petitioner initiated this action with the filing of his original complaint on October 20, 2023. (Doc. 1). Plaintiff filed the operative, first amended complaint on March 27, 2024. (Doc.

2 18). In connection with his most recent motion for leave to file a second amended complaint, the Court finds no evidence of prejudice, bad faith, undue delay in litigation, or futility. Plaintiff’s complaint has not yet been screened and no defendants have been served or otherwise appeared in this action. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion to amend will be granted. The second amended complaint (Doc. 20) is accepted for filing and will be screened by the Court in due course.

7 Plaintiff is advised that an amended complaint supersedes the original complaint. Lacey v. Maricopa Cnty., 693 F.3d 896, 927 (9th Cir. 2012). Therefore, the Court will screen the second amended complaint as a standalone document “complete in itself without reference to the prior or superseded pleading.” Local Rule 220.

11 The Court acknowledges Plaintiff’s second amended complaint alleges a claim pursuant the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA); however, Plaintiff’s separate motion to “correct” the docket to reflect that this action involves an FTCA claim as compared to a Bivens claim (Doc. 14) will be denied as Plaintiff has suffered no injury from the Clerk of the Court’s administration of the docket sheet.

16 II. Plaintiff’s Request for a Status Update 17 Furthermore, the Court is in receipt of Plaintiff’s motion “for consideration of the court to screen complaint within 60-Days,” which it construes as a request for a status report. (Doc. 18).

19 In the informational order, the Court advised Plaintiff: “This Court screens pro se plaintiffs’ complaint as expeditiously as possible. However, the Court has an extremely large number of pro se plaintiff civil rights cases pending before it, and delay is inevitable.” (Doc. 3 p. 22 3). “The Court will not respond in writing to individual inquiries regarding the status of a case.”

23 Id. at 4.

24 As set out by the informational order, the Court’s commitment to expeditiously screen complaints brought by pro se litigants is hampered by the sheer number of civil rights cases brought before it. In addition, Plaintiff’s second amended complaint replaces certain claims and adds additional facts for the Court’s consideration. As a necessary consequence of Plaintiff’s | complaint anew. Plaintiffs request for a status update therefore will be granted. The second || amended complaint will be screened in due course.

3 | Il. Order 4 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 5 1. Plaintiff's motion to amend (Doc. 19) is GRANTED and the lodged, second amended 6 complaint is deemed filed; 7 2. Plaintiffs motion to correct claim (Doc. 14) is DENIED; and 8 3. Plaintiffs request for a status update (Doc. 18) is GRANTED. The Court will screen 9 Plaintiff's second amended complaint in due course.

10 | IT IS SO ORDERED. | Dated: _ June 27, 2024 | Word bo 12 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE