ORDER RE PLAINTIFF'S ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE THAT DEFENDANT CONTINUES TO RETALIATE AGAINST HIM FOR FILING 1983 CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLAINT AGAINST THEM

[ECF Nos. 25, 29]

LINDA LOPEZ, Magistrate Judge.

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis. ECF No. 8. He filed a civil complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 related to incidents occurring while incarcerated at Richard J. Donovan Correctional Facility. ECF No. 3 ("FAC"). Before the Court is Plaintiff's document titled "Plaintiff's Additional Evidence That Defendant Continues to Retaliate Against Him For Filing 1983 Civil Rights Complaint Against Them." ECF No. 25. On December 7, 2018, the Court construed the filing as Plaintiff's motion for leave to file a supplemental pleading or amend his complaint, and ordered Defendants to respond. ECF No. 26. Defendants timely filed an opposition to Plaintiff's motion to amend the complaint, arguing futility. ECF No. 27. Before the Court issued an order regarding Plaintiff's motion, Plaintiff filed a document titled "Plaintiff's Evidence In Support That Defendants Continue to Retaliate, Harrass [sic] and Generate False Disciplinary Reports On Him For Pending Complaint Against Defendants" on January 25, 2019, nunc pro tunc. ECF No. 29. On January 31, 2019, District Judge Sammartino issued an order granting in part and denying in part Defendants' motion to dismiss and ordering Plaintiff to file an amended complaint, if any, on or before February 28, 2019. ECF No. 30 at 21.

In light of District Judge Sammartino's order permitting Plaintiff to file an amended complaint, Plaintiff's motion to supplement or amend is deemed moot. The Court cautions Plaintiff that his Second Amended Complaint will supersede, or replace, the First Amended Complaint filed on February 26, 2018 [ECF No. 3], and that therefore, his Second Amended Complaint must be complete by itself, name all the parties he wishes to sue, and allege all the claims he wishes to pursue in one single, concise pleading titled "Second Amended Complaint." See Lacey v. Maricopa Cty., 693 F.3d 896, 925, 928 (9th Cir. 2012); see also ECF No. 30 at 21-22 ("Plaintiff's amended complaint must cure the deficiencies noted herein and must be complete in itself without reference to the original complaint. Any claims not re-alleged in the amended complaint will be considered waived." (citations omitted)).

IT IS SO ORDERED.