1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 LARONDA MYERS, Case No. 2:25-cv-01926-TLN-CSK 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MISCELLANEOUS MOTIONS 14 LACHONA LAW, et al.,

15 Defendants. (ECF Nos. 7, 8, 10) 16 17 Pending before the Court are the following miscellaneous motions filed by Plaintiff 18 LaRonda Myers, who is proceeding without counsel in this action:1 (1) motion for leave 19 to file an amended complaint (ECF No. 7); (2) motion for extension of time to serve the 20 amended complaint (ECF No. 8); and (3) renewed request for extension of time to serve 21 the amended complaint (ECF No. 10). No defendant has responded or appeared in this 22 action. See Docket. 23 Plaintiff amended her complaint on September 23, 2025 by filing her First 24 Amended Complaint (“FAC”), which is permitted once as a matter of course pursuant to 25 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(1)(B). See FAC (ECF No. 5). 26 On October 3, 2025, Plaintiff filed a motion for leave to file a second amended 27 1 This matter proceeds before the undersigned pursuant to

, Fed. R. 28 Civ. P. 72, and Local Rule 302(c). 1 complaint. (ECF No. 7.) Plaintiff seeks to dismiss judicial defendants from this action and 2 make necessary corrections related to these defendants in the amended complaint.

3 at 1. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2), leave to amend shall be freely 4 given when justice so requires. In the absence of [...] undue delay, bad faith or dilatory 5 motive on the part of the movant, repeated failure to cure deficiencies by amendments 6 previously allowed, undue prejudice to the opposing party by virtue of allowance of the 7 amendment, futility of amendment, etc.- the leave sought should, as the rules require, be 8 ‘freely given.’” Foman v. Davis,

(1962) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)). 9 “Absent prejudice, or a strong showing of any of the remaining Foman factors, there 10 exists a presumption under Rule 15(a) in favor of granting leave to amend.” Eminence 11 Capital, LLC v. Aspeon, Inc.,

(9th Cir. 2003). 12 Here, the Court finds that granting leave to amend does not implicate any of the 13 Foman factors. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file a second amended 14 complaint will be granted, and the Second Amended Complaint shall be filed within thirty 15 (30) days from the date of this order. In addition, because Plaintiff will be amending her 16 amended complaint, Plaintiff’s motions for extension of time to serve the amended 17 complaint are denied as moot. 18 Plaintiff is further informed that the court cannot refer to a prior complaint or other 19 filing in order to make the amended complaint complete. Local Rule 220 requires that an 20 amended complaint be complete in itself without reference to any prior pleading. As a 21 general rule, an amended complaint supersedes prior complaint(s), and once the 22 amended complaint is filed and served, any previous complaint no longer serves any 23 function in the case. Lacey v. Maricopa Cnty.,

(9th Cir. 2012). The 24 amended complaint should be titled “Second Amended Complaint.” 25 Finally, Plaintiff is further cautioned to carefully review the Federal Rules of Civil 26 Procedure, the Local Rules for the Eastern District of California,2 and Judge Kim’s Civil 27 2 The Local Rules of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of 28 California are available on the district court’s website: 1 || Standing Orders.? Pro se litigants are expected to know and comply with the rules of civil 2 || procedure. See American Ass'n of Naturopathic Physicians v. Hayhurst,

, 3 | 1108 (9th Cir. 2000); see also McNeil v. United States,

(1993) □□□□□□ 4 | have never suggested that procedural rules in ordinary civil litigation should be 5 || interpreted so as to excuse mistakes by those who proceed without counsel.”). 6 ORDER 7 In conclusion, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 8 1. Plaintiff's motion for leave to file an amended complaint (ECF No. 7) is 9 GRANTED; 10 2. Plaintiff shall have thirty (30) days from the date of this order to file a Second 11 Amended Complaint that complies with the instructions provided above. If 12 Plaintiff fails to timely comply with this order, the undersigned may recommend 13 that this action be dismissed; 14 3. Plaintiffs motion for extension of time to serve the amended complaint (ECF 15 No. 8) is DENIED as moot; and 16 4. Plaintiff's renewed request for extension of time to serve the amended 17 complaint (ECF No. 10) is DENIED as moot. 18 19 | Dated: October 27, 2025 C iy S \U 20 CHI SOO KIM UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 22 || 4, myer1926.25 23 24 25 26 https://www.caed.uscourts.gov/caednew/index.cfm/rules/local-rules/. 27 | ° Judge Kim’s Civil Standing Orders are available on Judge Kim’s webpage on the district court’s website: https://www.caed.uscourts.gov/caednew/index.cfm/judges/all- 28 | judges/united-states-magistrate-judge-chi-soo-kim-csk/.