IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
February 3, 2011
RODNEY LANCE HARMON, PLAINTIFF,
DR. FOX, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kendall J. Newman United States Magistrate Judge
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel with this civil rights action seeking relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
On January 19, 2011, plaintiff filed a motion for leave to amend his complaint. Plaintiff's motion was not, however, accompanied by a proposed amended complaint. As a litigant proceeding in forma pauperis, plaintiff's pleadings are subject to evaluation by this court pursuant to the in forma pauperis statute. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Because plaintiff did not submit a proposed amended complaint, the court is unable to evaluate it. Plaintiff's motion for leave to amend must therefore be denied.
On January 27, 2011, plaintiff filed a motion for law library access. Plaintiff alleges that in order to obtain law library access, he must have a court order. Plaintiff does not allege why he requires law library access. For this reason, the undersigned finds that plaintiff's motion for law library access is not well supported.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff's motion to amend (Dkt. No. 19) is denied;
2. Plaintiff's motion for law library access (Dkt. No. 20) is denied.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.