1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ROBERT G. SAENZ, Case No. 1:23-cv-01303-KES-BAM (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER CONSTRUING PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE REGARDING THIRD AMENDED 13 v. COMPLAINT AS MOTION TO AMEND (ECF No. 40) 14 BRINTON, et al., ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION 15 Defendants. TO AMEND (ECF No. 40) 16 THIRTY (30) DAY DEADLINE 17 18 Plaintiff Robert G. Saenz (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner appearing pro se and in forma 19 pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to

. Plaintiff’s third amended 20 complaint, filed October 15, 2025, is currently pending screening. (ECF No. 38.) 21 On December 11, 2025, Plaintiff filed a letter to the Court regarding the third amended 22 complaint. (ECF No. 40.) Plaintiff states that in reviewing his copy of the submitted and filed 23 third amended complaint, he noticed that he did not place page numbers on each page, and a few 24 pages are out of order, as drafted. Plaintiff requests that the Court review its copy, and if there 25 are no page numbers, to notify him immediately and he will send a correctly numbered and in 26 order copy. (Id.) 27 The Court construes the letter as a motion to file an amended complaint. Under Rule 28 15(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a party may amend the party’s pleading once as a 1 matter of course at any time before a responsive pleading is served. Otherwise, a party may 2 amend only by leave of the court or by written consent of the adverse party, and leave shall be 3 freely given when justice so requires. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a). “Rule 15(a) is very liberal and leave 4 to amend shall be freely given when justice so requires.” AmerisourceBergen Corp. v. Dialysist 5 West, Inc.,

(9th Cir. 2006) (citation and quotation omitted). However, courts 6 “need not grant leave to amend where the amendment: (1) prejudices the opposing party; (2) is 7 sought in bad faith; (3) produces an undue delay in litigation; or (4) is futile.”

8 Having considered the motion and reviewed the October 15, 2025 third amended 9 complaint, the Court finds no evidence of prejudice, bad faith, undue delay in litigation, or 10 futility. Plaintiff’s third amended complaint has not yet been screened, and no defendants have 11 been served or have appeared in this action. Plaintiff’s motion to amend shall be granted, solely 12 for the purpose of filing a third amended complaint with page numbering and pages in the 13 correct order. Plaintiff may not change the nature of this suit by adding new, unrelated claims in 14 his amended complaint. George v. Smith,

(7th Cir. 2007) (no “buckshot” 15 complaints). Plaintiff is advised that an amended complaint supersedes the original complaint. 16 Lacey v. Maricopa Cty.,

(9th Cir. 2012). Therefore, Plaintiff’s amended 17 complaint must be “complete in itself without reference to the prior or superseded pleading.” 18 Local Rule 220. Plaintiff's amended complaint may not exceed twenty-five (25) pages, 19 exclusive of exhibits. 20 Once filed, the corrected third amended complaint will be screened in due course. 21 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows: 22 1. Plaintiff’s December 11, 2025 notice regarding the third amended complaint, (ECF No. 23 40), is CONSTRUED as a motion to amend; 24 2. Plaintiff’s motion to amend, (ECF No. 40), is GRANTED, solely for the purpose of 25 filing a third amended complaint with page numbering and pages in the correct 26 order; 27 3. Within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall file a third 28 amended complaint, as discussed in this order, not to exceed twenty-five (25) pages, 1 exclusive of exhibits; and 2 4. If Plaintiff fails to file a corrected third amended complaint in compliance with this order, 3 the Court will screen the October 15, 2025 third amended complaint as currently filed. 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5

6 Dated: December 16, 2025 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 7

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28