IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
November 7, 2011
MALIK JONES, PLAINTIFF,
T. FELKER, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He seeks clarification and modification of the court's order screening his first amended complaint. Dckt. No. 29.
In his request for clarification, plaintiff notes that, in screening the original complaint, the court found that plaintiff had stated cognizable claims against defendants Gunter and Wright, but, in screening the amended complaint, found no cognizable claims against these defendants. Plaintiff further notes that his allegations against defendants Gunter and Wright did not change from the original to the amended complaints. Plaintiff requests that the court find that he has stated cognizable claims against defendants Gunter and Wright and order service on these defendants.
Regardless of the initial screening order, the court retains authority under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2) and 1915A to dismiss claims it determines are not cognizable. As plaintiff's amended complaint superceded his original complaint, the court's screening order regarding the amended complaint now governs this case. For the reasons stated therein, plaintiff's allegations against defendants Gunter and Wright do not suffice to state a cognizable claim. See Dckt. No. 28 at 7.
Accordingly, plaintiff's September 26, 2011 request for modification of the screening order issued September 15, 2011 is denied.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.