1

2

3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4 DISTRICT OF NEVADA

5 SCOTT MARTIN JR., Case No. 3:25-cv-00361-ART-CLB 6 Plaintiff, ORDER 7 v.

8 WASHOE COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE, et al., 9 Defendants. 10 11 Plaintiff Scott Martin Jr. brings this action to proceed under

1983 against Defendants Washoe County Sheriff’s Office (“WSCO”), Washoe 13 County District Attorney’s Office, Second Judicial Courthouse, and Reno Police 14 Department (“RPD”), (collectively, “Defendants”) for false arrest, false 15 imprisonment, and cruel and unusual punishment after an arrest for battery on 16 a pregnant person that occurred sometime between 2022 and 2023. (ECF No. 1- 17 1.) 18 Before the Court is Mr. Martin’s application to proceed in forma pauperis 19 (“IFP”) (ECF No. 6), and pro se civil rights complaint (ECF No. 1-1). Magistrate 20 Judge Carla L. Baldwin issued a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) 21 recommending that Mr. Martin’s application to proceed IFP be granted, but that 22 is complaint be dismissed with leave to amend and that his claims against the 23 Second Judicial Courthouse be dismissed with prejudice. (ECF No. 7.) 24 For the foregoing reasons, the Court adopts the magistrate judge’s R&R. 25 I. LEGAL STANDARD 26 Under the Federal Magistrates Act, a court “may accept, reject, or modify, 27 in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by [a] magistrate 28 judge.”

(b)(1). Where a party timely objects to a magistrate judge's 1 report and recommendation, then the court is required to “make a de 2 novo determination of those portions of the [report and recommendation] to which 3 objection is made.”

(b)(1). A court is not required to conduct “any 4 review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection.” Thomas v. 5 Arn,

(1985). 6 Plaintiff has not filed an objection to the magistrate judge’s R&R and his 7 time to do so has now expired. (ECF No. 7.) 8 II. ANALYSIS 9 The magistrate judge recommends dismissal of Mr. Martin’s complaint 10 because he fails to state essential elements of his claim for Monell liability, false 11 arrest, and cruel and unusual punishment against each of the named 12 Defendants. (ECF No. 7.) The Court agrees with the magistrate judge’s reasoning 13 and adopts her R&R in full. 14 If Mr. Martin chooses to file an amended complaint, he is advised that an 15 amended complaint supersedes (replaces) the original complaint and, thus, the 16 amended complaint must be complete in itself. See Hal Roach Studios, Inc. v. 17 Richard Feiner & Co., Inc.,

(9th Cir. 1989) (holding that “[t]he 18 fact that a party was named in the original complaint is irrelevant; an amended 19 pleading supersedes the original”). Any allegations, parties, or requests for relief 20 from prior papers that are not carried forward will no longer be before the court. 21 Mr. Martin should clearly title the amended pleading as “First Amended 22 Complaint.” For each Defendant and each claim, he must allege true facts 23 sufficient to show that the Defendant violated his rights. 24 III. CONCLUSION 25 It is therefore ordered that Mr. Martin’s application to proceed in forma 26 pauperis, (ECF No. 6) is GRANTED. 27 It is further ordered that the Clerk FILE the complaint, (ECF No. 1-1) but 28 not issue summons at this time. 1 It is further ordered that the complaint be DISMISSED without prejudice 2 || and with leave to amend. 3 It is further ordered that the Second Judicial Courthouse be dismissed with 4 || prejudice. 5 It is further ordered that if Mr. Martin chooses to file an amended complaint 6 || curing the deficiencies of his original complaint, Mr. Martin shall file the amended 7 || complaint by November 2, 2024. 8 It is further ordered that if Mr. Martin chooses not to file an amended 9 || complaint curing the stated deficiencies of the complaint, this action will be 10 || DISMISSED for failure to state a claim. 11 12 Dated this 2"4 day of October, 2025. 13 14 Ares jlasect Re Is ANNER.TRAUM 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28