Villadelgado v. Williams ( 2024 )

2 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 4 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 4 5 5 GODERICK VILLADELGADO, Case No.: 2:23-cv-01146-GMN-NJK 6 6 Plaintiff, 7 ORDER 7 v. 8 (Docket Nos. 3, 5, 8, 9, 11) 8 JULIE WILLIAMS, et al., 9 9 Defendants. 10 10 11 Plaintiff Goderick Villadelgado, an inmate in the custody of the Nevada Department of 11 12 Corrections, initiated this case with an application to proceed in forma pauperis and a civil rights 12 13 complaint filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Docket Nos. 1, 1-1. Plaintiff subsequently filed a motion 13 14 for appointment of counsel, three motions to amend or supplement the complaint, and a motion to 14 15 order the Defendants to respond to the complaint. Docket Nos. 3, 5, 8, 9, 11. The Court will 15 16 consider Plaintiff’s motions in turn. 16 17 I. PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS 17 18 A. Appointment of Counsel 18 19 A litigant does not have a constitutional right to appointed counsel in 42 U.S.C. § 1983 19 20 civil rights claims. Storseth v. Spellman, 654 F.2d 1349, 1353 (9th Cir. 1981). Pursuant to 28 20 21 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1), “[t]he court may request an attorney to represent any person unable to afford 21 22 counsel.” However, the court will appoint counsel for indigent civil litigants only in “exceptional 22 23 circumstances.” Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir. 2009) (§ 1983 action). “When 23 24 determining whether ‘exceptional circumstances’ exist, a court must consider ‘the likelihood of 24 25 success on the merits as well as the ability of the petitioner to articulate his claims pro se in light 25 26 of the complexity of the legal issues involved.” Id. “Neither of these considerations is dispositive 26 27 and instead must be viewed together.” Id. 27 28 28 2 segregation and never returned. Docket No. 2-1. This does not appear to be a particularly complex 2 3 factual or legal issue. In his motion for appointment of counsel, Plaintiff does not provide any 3 4 argument or explanation to support that exceptional circumstances exist in this case warranting the 4 5 appointment of counsel. Docket No. 3. As such, the Court does not find exceptional circumstances 5 6 warranting the appointment of counsel at this time, and the Court denies the motion without 6 7 prejudice. 7 8 B. Amend and Supplement Complaint 8 9 Plaintiff has filed a motion to amend the complaint, as well as two motions to supplement 9 10 the complaint. Docket Nos. 5, 8, 9. The Court will not piecemeal Plaintiff’s complaint together 10 11 from multiple filings. Plaintiff’s operative complaint must contain all claims, defendants, and 11 12 factual allegations that Plaintiff wishes to pursue in this lawsuit. Accordingly, the Court gives 12 13 Plaintiff leave to file a single, complete, first amended complaint on or before March 22, 2024. If 13 14 Plaintiff does not file a first amended complaint, the Court will screen the initial complaint and 14 15 will not consider any allegations in Plaintiff’s motions to amend and supplement the complaint. 15 16 If Plaintiff chooses to file an amended complaint, he is advised that an amended complaint 16 17 supersedes (replaces) the original complaint, and, thus, the amended complaint must be complete 17 18 in itself. See Hal Roach Studios, Inc. v. Richard Feiner & Co., Inc., 896 F.2d 1542, 1546 (9th Cir. 18 19 1989) (holding that “[t]he fact that a party was named in the original complaint is irrelevant; an 19 20 amended pleading supersedes the original”); see also Lacey v. Maricopa Cnty., 693 F.3d 896, 928 20 21 (9th Cir. 2012) (holding that for claims dismissed with prejudice, a plaintiff is not required to 21 22 reallege such claims in a subsequent amended complaint to preserve them for appeal). Plaintiff’s 22 23 amended complaint must contain all claims, defendants, and factual allegations that Plaintiff 23 24 wishes to pursue in this lawsuit. Moreover, Plaintiff must file the amended complaint on this 24 25 Court’s approved prisoner civil rights form, and it must be entitled “First Amended Complaint.” 25 26 C. Order Requiring the Defendants to Answer the Complaint 26 27 Plaintiff has filed a motion requesting that the Court order the Defendants to respond to his 27 28 complaint. Docket No. 11. As explained in the Court’s advisory letter, the Court must screen 28 4| Plaintiff's complaint to determine whether it contains any valid claims before this case moves 2| forward. Docket No. 4. This is a process that can take many months. This case remains at the 3] screening stage, and the complaint has not yet been served on Defendants. Therefore, Defendants 4| are not required to respond to the complaint at this time, and the Court denies Plaintiff’s motion. 5 Accordingly, for the reasons stated above, 6 IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED. Docket 7| No.3. 8 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motions to amend and supplement the g} complaint are DENIED. Docket Nos. 5, 8, 9. 10 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff is given leave to file a single, complete, first 41| amended complaint no later than March 22, 2024. 12 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion to order Defendants to respond to the complaint is DENIED. Docket No. 11. 14 IT IS SO ORDERED. 15 DATED: February 22, 2024. 16 em □□ UNITED'STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28