Herrera v. Benavides

Background

Joshua S. Herrera, a state inmate proceeding without a lawyer, filed a civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against officers at Salinas Valley State Prison. The court had previously dismissed his original complaint but allowed him to amend it to correct pleading deficiencies.

Herrera then filed a first amended complaint under Docket No. 9. The court found that the filing appeared to be missing page 2. According to the order, that page was essential because it showed exhaustion of administrative remedies, identified the defendants, and began the statement of facts.

Ruling

The court struck the first amended complaint and granted Herrera leave to file a new first amended complaint. The new complaint had to be filed within 28 days of the order and had to correct the deficiencies described in the earlier order allowing amendment. It also had to include the caption and civil case number used in the order, the words “FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT” on its first page, and answers to all questions if Herrera used the court’s form.

The court explained that the amended complaint would replace the original complaint. Claims omitted from the new amended complaint would no longer be claims, and defendants not named in it would no longer be defendants. The court warned that failing to comply on time would result in dismissal with prejudice of the action for failure to state a claim, without further notice to Herrera.

Effect of the Order

This was a procedural order about the form and filing of Herrera’s pleading. The court did not decide whether his civil-rights claims were legally valid or whether the defendants were liable. Judge Beth Labson Freeman ordered the clerk to send Herrera a copy of the filed amended complaint and two copies of the court’s complaint form with the order.