IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
August 24, 2011
JOHN L. HARRIS III, PLAINTIFF,
KAMALA HARRIS, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS IN HER OFFICIAL CAPACITY, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kendall J. Newman United States Magistrate Judge
Plaintiff is proceeding without counsel in this action.*fn1
Plaintiff filed his original complaint (Dkt. No. 1) on August
17, 2011, and his First Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 5) on August 18,
2011. Plaintiff properly filed his First Amended Complaint as a matter
of right pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
On August 22, 2011, plaintiff filed a "Second Amended Complaint." (Dkt. No. 7.) Before that filing, which constitutes a third version of his pleading, however, plaintiff did not seek leave of court. According to the court's docket, plaintiff also failed to obtain the written consent of the opposing parties regarding the filing of his Second Amended Complaint. Therefore, plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 7) runs afoul of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a).*fn3
Under Federal Rule 15(a), a plaintiff may amend his pleading only "once as a matter of course." Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a) (emphasis added). Plaintiff exhausted his single amendment as a matter of right when he filed his First Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 5). Id. Accordingly, plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 7) was improperly filed and is of no legal effect, and the court will strike that pleading pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f)(1) and the court's inherent power.
For the foregoing reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 7) is stricken. The First Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 5) serves as the operative complaint in this matter. If plaintiff wishes to file an amended pleading, plaintiff is directed to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2) and Eastern District Local Rule 137(c).
IT IS SO ORDERED.