Law v. Mooney ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 CARLOS GILBERT LAW, Case No. 23-cv-05287-JST 8 Plaintiff, ORDER REGARDING AMENDED 9 v. COMPLAINT 10 STAR MOONEY, et al., Re: ECF No. 10 Defendants. 11 12 13 Plaintiff has filed the instant pro se civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On 14 November 13, 2023, the Court screened the complaint and found that it stated a cognizable claim 15 against Defendant San Francisco Police Department (“SFPD”) Officer Balingit and dismissed the 16 claims against SFPD Officers Mooney and Russak, as well as the Monell claim against the City 17 and County of San Francisco with leave to amend. On November 16, Plaintiff filed an amended 18 complaint with the Court. ECF No. 10. While the amended complaint names Officer Balingit in 19 the caption, the body of the complaint only states a claim against Officer Mooney. Id. Naming a 20 defendant in the caption is insufficient to state a claim against the person and an amended 21 complaint completely replaces the previous complaints. Falck N. Cal. Corp. v. Scott Griffith 22 Collaborative Sols., LLC, 25 F.4th 763, 765 (9th Cir. 2022); see also Ferrin v. City of San Rafael, 23 No. 22-cv-02101-JST, 2022 WL 20243402, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 14, 2022). Accordingly, the 24 amended complaint waives the cognizable claims against Officer Balingit that were stated in the 25 initial complaint, and Officer Balingit will no longer be a defendant in this action. 26 Because the Court is uncertain whether Plaintiff seeks to waive his claims against Officer 27 Balingit, the Court orders Plaintiff to inform the Court, within twenty-eight days of the date of this 1 that he wishes to proceed with the amended complaint, the Court will screen the amended 2 || complaint at that time. 3 Because an amended complaint completely replaces the previous complaints, Plaintiff 4 || must include in his second amended complaint all the claims he wishes to present, all of the 5 defendants he wishes to sue, and all the relief he requests, including claims, defendants, and 6 || requests for relief presented in prior complaints. Plaintiff may not incorporate material from the 7 || prior complaints by reference. Piecemeal amendments of pleadings are disfavored. The Court 8 || will not piece together Plaintiff's claims, named defendants, and requests for relief from different 9 || pleadings. 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. ® 11 Dated: December 8, 2023 JON S. TIGAR 13 nited States District Judge 15 16 = 17 Z 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28