Bradford v. Contra Costa County Detention Facilities ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 DONALD BRADFORD, 11 Case No. 21-06433 BLF (PR) Plaintiff, 12 ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH LEAVE TO AMEND; GRANTING v. 13 EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE COMPLETE IN FORMA PAUPERIS 14 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY APPLICATION DETENTION FACILITES, 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 Plaintiff, who is currently detained at the West County Detention Facility in 19 Richmond, California, filed a document entitled “Civil Suit” in which he “request to sue 20 pro se packet Contra Costa County Detention Facilities.” Dkt. No. 1. The Clerk construed 21 this filing as an attempt to file a pro se civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 22 The Clerk sent Plaintiff a copy of the court’s complaint form, Dkt. No. 2, and a notice to 23 file a complete In Forma Pauperis (“IFP”) application, Dkt. No. 3. Plaintiff was also 24 notified that the matter was assigned to a magistrate judge, and that he must either consent 25 or decline magistrate judge jurisdiction. Dkt. No. 4. On September 27, 2021, the matter 26 was reassigned to this Court after Plaintiff did not file consent to magistrate jurisdiction in 27 the time provided by the notice. Dkt. No. 7. 1 only the first page is partially filled out and the document is not signed. Dkt. No. 8. 2 Furthermore, the IFP application is also incomplete because the “Certificate of Funds in 3 Prisoner’s Account” has not been completed and signed by an authorized officer and 4 Plaintiff does not provide a six-month statement of his trust account in support of the 5 application. Dkt. No. 9. 6 In the interest of justice, Plaintiff shall be granted an opportunity to file an amended 7 complaint on the court form, making sure to provide all the information required in the 8 form and signing it at the end. Plaintiff is also granted an extension of time to file a 9 complete IFP application by filing the required supporting documents. 10 11 CONCLUSION 12 For the foregoing reasons, the Court orders as follows: 13 1. The complaint is DISMISSED with leave to amend. Within twenty-eight 14 (28) days of the date this order is filed, Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint to attempt 15 to correct the deficiencies discussed above. The amended complaint must include the 16 caption and civil case number used in this order, Case No. C 21-06433 BLF (PR), and the 17 words “AMENDED COMPLAINT” on the first page. If using the court form complaint, 18 Plaintiff must answer all the questions on the form in order for the action to proceed. 19 The amended complaint supersedes the original, the latter being treated thereafter as 20 non-existent. Ramirez v. Cty. Of San Bernardino, 806 F.3d 1002, 1008 (9th Cir. 2015). 21 Consequently, claims not included in an amended complaint are no longer claims and 22 defendants not named in an amended complaint are no longer defendants. See Ferdik v. 23 Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1262 (9th Cir.1992). 24 2. Also within twenty-eight (28) days of the date this order is filed, Plaintiff 25 shall filed a completed “Certificate of Funds in Prisoner’s Account” which is completed 26 and signed by an authorized officer along with a copy of his prisoner’s trust account 1 3. Failure to respond in accordance with this order by filing an amended 2 || complaint in the time provided will result in dismissal with prejudice of this action 3 for failure to state a claim, without further notice to Plaintiff. The matter will also be 4 || dismissed if Plaintiff fails to file the supporting documents to support his IFP 5 || application in the same time provided. 6 The Clerk shall include two copies of the court’s complaint, and a blank “Certificate 7 || of Funds in Prisoner’s Account” with a copy of this order to Plaintiff. 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. 9 || Dated: _ December 21, 2021 heh Llyn ame 10 BETH LABSON FREEMAN United States District Judge 11 13 14 o 15 16 Oo Z 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Order of Dism. with Leave to Amend; Granting Ext. of Time to File IFP PRO-SE\BLF\CR.21\06433Bradford_dwlta&ifp 26 27