Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Avila v. Cate

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


February 5, 2010

PERRY ROBERT AVILA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
MATTHEW CATE, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sandra M. Snyder United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR ORDER RECOGNIZING COGNIZABILITY OF FIRST AND EIGHTH AMENDMENT CLAIMS OR FOR LEAVE TO FILE A PARTIAL AMENDMENT (Doc. 10)

Plaintiff Perry Robert Avila, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on May 26, 2009. On February 1, 2010, Plaintiff filed a motion seeking an order recognizing the cognizability of his First and Eighth Amendment claim, or for an order granting him leave to file a partial amendment to his complaint clarifying his claims.

Plaintiff's complaint does not state a claim for violation of the First or for violation of the Eighth Amendment, and therefore, Plaintiff's motion seeking an order recognizing the cognizability of such claims is denied. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009); Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 1964-65 (2007); 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.

Further, amended pleadings must be complete within themselves without reference to another pleading, and therefore, partial amendments are not permissible. Local Rule 220.

For these reasons, Plaintiff's motion is HEREBY ORDERED DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20100205

© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.