UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
October 18, 2011
JORGE D. GARCIA,
JAMES A. YATES, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Michael J. Seng United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO AMEND AS UNNECESSARY (ECF No. 10)
Plaintiff Jorge D. Garcia ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed the instant action in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Fresno on August 27, 2009. (ECF No. 1.) Defendants filed a Notice of Removal on December 29, 2009, and the case was removed to this Court. (Id.) Plaintiff has consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. (ECF No. 5).
Plaintiff's Complaint was screened and dismissed, with leave to amend, on August 23, 2011. (ECF No. 8.) Plaintiff's filed his First Amended Complaint on September 21, 2011. (ECF No. 9.) Plaintiff also filed a Motion to Correct the Pleading on September 21, 2011. (ECF No. 10.)
Plaintiff's Motion to Correct the Pleading is now before the Court. In his motion, Plaintiff asks for leave to amend his First Amended Complaint for two reasons: (1) Plaintiff was not sure if he signed and dated the First Amended Complaint and (2), Plaintiff filed the Complaint without copies.
The First Amended Complaint was signed but not dated. It will be deemed effective on the date it was filed. Moreover, even though it was filed without copies, the Court will accept it as filed.
Because the First Amended Complaint has been accepted by the Court and Plaintiff seeks to make no substantive change to it, leave to amend is moot and unnecessary.
Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion to Correct Pleading is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.