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.

Martin Vazquez, Cdcr #D-18168 v. George A. Neotti; Suglish; B. Koen; R. Davis; Jannush; Payne; Jaca; Hurbert

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


June 4, 2012

MARTIN VAZQUEZ, CDCR #D-18168, PLAINTIFF,
v.
GEORGE A. NEOTTI; SUGLISH; B. KOEN; R. DAVIS; JANNUSH; PAYNE; JACA; HURBERT; DR. SEGAL; SANCHEZ,
DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Irma E. Gonzalez, Chief Judge United States District Court

Order (1) Striking Previously Filed Fourth Amended Complaint [Doc. 21]; (2) Granting Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Fourth Amended Complaint; (3) Directing Clerk to Issue Summonses on Fourth Amended Complaint

By order filed April 6, 2012, the Court dismissed without prejudice Defendants Neotti, Suglish, Koen, Davis, Jannush, Payne, Jaca, Seagal and Sanchez because Plaintiff's Third Amended Complaint failed to allege any claims against them. The Court ordered service of the Third Amended Complaint only upon Defendant Hubert, the only person against whom Plaintiff made allegations in the Third Amended Complaint.

Thereafter, on April 18, 2012, the Court received*fn1 Plaintiff's Fourth Amended Complaint [Doc. 21], re-asserting claims against Defendants Neotti, Suglish, Koen, Davis, Jannush, Sanchez, Hubert. On May 16, 2012, the Court received another Fourth Amended Complaint from Plaintiff, asserting claims against Defendants Neotti, Suglish, Koen, Davis, Jannush, Hubert, and Sanchez identical to those contained in the pleading filed on April 18, 2012. Plaintiff seeks leave to file this Fourth Amended Complaint.

Because Plaintiff did not obtain leave to file the prior pleading [Doc. 21], the Court orders the pleading stricken from the record. However, the Court finds the interests of justice would be served by allowing Plaintiff file one final amended pleading setting forth all of his claims against all of the defendants. Therefore, the court GRANTS Plaintiff's motion for leave to file Fourth Amended Complaint. The Clerk shall file Plaintiff's Fourth Amended Complaint and it shall be the operative pleading in this case.

The Clerk is directed to issue a summons on Plaintiff's Fourth Amended Complaint as to Defendants Neotti, Suglish, Koen, Davis, Jannush, Hubert*fn2 , and Sanchez. The Clerk is directed to forward the summons to Plaintiff along with a blank U.S. Marshal Form 285 for each of the seven defendants, a copy of the Court's November 17, 2011 order granting Plaintiff leave to proceed IFP [Doc. 5], and copies of the Fourth Amended Complaint and summons for purposes of serving each of the seven Defendants. Upon receipt of this "IFP Package," Plaintiff is directed to complete the Form 285s as completely and accurately as possible, and to return them to the U.S. Marshal according to the instructions provided by the clerk in the letter accompanying his IFP package. Thereafter, the U.S. Marshal shall serve a copy of the Fourth Amended Complaint and summons upon each Defendant as directed by Plaintiff on each Form 285. All costs of service shall be advanced by the United States pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3).

IT IS SO ORDERED.


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.