(PS) Peterson v. County of Sacramento Sheriff's Department ( 2024 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DESIREE PETERSON, Case No. 2:18-cv-00836-KJM-JDP (PS) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER 13 v. GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO AMEND THE COMPLAINT AND DENYING 14 COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO HER MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT, et al., PAUPERIS AS UNNECESSARY 15 Defendants. ECF Nos. 17 & 19 16 AMENDED COMPLAINT DUE WITHIN 17 THIRTY DAYS 18 19 20 Plaintiff, proceeding in forma pauperis and without counsel, filed this civil rights action 21 against various Sacramento County Departments and employees. Plaintiff moves to amend her 22 complaint and to proceed in forma pauperis. ECF Nos. 17 & 19. Plaintiff’s motion to amend is 23 granted, but her motion to proceed in forma pauperis is denied as unnecessary since the court 24 previously granted plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis. See ECF No. 10. 25 Plaintiff is notified that her amended complaint may only include claims that are related to 26 those contained in her original complaint; unrelated claims against multiple defendants belong in 27 separate suits. She is also reminded that the amended complaint will supersede the current 28 1 | complaint. See Lacey v. Maricopa Cnty., 693 F. 3d 896, 907 n.1 (9th Cir. 2012) (en banc). 2 | Accordingly, plaintiff's amended complaint must be complete on its face without reference to the 3 | prior pleading. See E.D. Cal. L.R. 220. 4 Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that: 5 1. Plaintiff's motion to amend complaint, ECF No. 19, is granted. 6 2. Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint within thirty days of the date of this order. 7 3. Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis, ECF No. 17, is denied as unnecessary. 8 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. 10 ( 1 Ow — Dated: _ January 4, 2024 q———_ 11 JEREMY D. PETERSON 10 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28