IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
September 26, 2012
DANIEL CRAIG BURGDORF, PLAINTIFF,
CAPTAIN FITCH, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Carolyn K. Delaney United States Magistrate Judge
Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with an action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. By order filed August 27, 2012, plaintiff's complaint was dismissed with leave to file an amended complaint.
On September 11, 2012, plaintiff filed an amended complaint. Then on September 13, he filed a document titled "Appendix D. (2), Cause of Action - Individual Defendants." This document amends plaintiff's amended complaint. In the court's August 27, 2012 order, however, plaintiff was advised that "Local Rule 220 requires that an amended complaint be complete in itself . . ." Therefore, plaintiff's amended complaint will be dismissed with leave to file a second amended complaint which is "complete in itself."
Furthermore, the court notes that plaintiff asserts claims arising under California law in his amended complaint. To the extent plaintiff wishes to assert a claim under California law in his second amended complaint he must plead compliance with California's Tort Claims Act or such claims will be dismissed. See Cal. Gov't Code § 910; Mangold v. Cal. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 67 F.3d. 1470, 1477 (9th Cir. 1995).
In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff's amended complaint is dismissed; and
2. Plaintiff is granted thirty days from the date of service of this order to file a second amended complaint that complies with the requirements of this order, the court's August 27, 2012 order, the Civil Rights Act, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the Local Rules of Practice. The second amended complaint must bear the docket number assigned this case and must be labeled "Second Amended Complaint." Plaintiff must file an original and two copies of the second amended complaint. Failure to file a second amended complaint in accordance with this order will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.