LAWRENCE O. ANDERSON, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint. (Doc. 97) On December 9, 2013, the undersigned Magistrate Judge issued an order granting Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint, doc. 86, and authorizing Plaintiff to file a Second Amended Complaint. (Doc. 95) The December 9, 2013 Order noted that, upon the filing of the Second Amended Complaint, a service-of-process order would issue regarding the two newly-named defendants. This is that order.
1. Statutory Screening of Prisoner Complaints
A district court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against a governmental entity or an officer or an employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The court must dismiss a complaint, or portion thereof, if the plaintiff has raised claims that are legally frivolous or malicious, fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1), (2).
The assigned District Judge screened Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint, doc. 9, in an order issued on June 22, 2012. (Doc. 11) The District Judge determined the First Amended Complaint stated Eighth Amendment claims for excessive force against Defendants Forbes and Sanchez. (Doc. 11 at 3-4) Plaintiff alleged Corrections Officers ("CO") Forbes and Sanchez used excessive force against him when they entered his cell on July 15, 2011. Plaintiff claims they punched him in the face and body several times, used handcuffs "like brass knuckles" to strike him, kicked him in the face and body, and knocked him unconscious. (Doc. 9 at 3-5)
After discovery revealed the true identities of the prison officers Plaintiff intended to name as defendants, Plaintiff moved to amend the First Amended Complaint which, as noted above, was granted. Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint does not change the underlying facts supporting his Eighth Amendment excessive force claims. The only changes are the identities of the officers against whom the claims are alleged. Specifically, Plaintiff names CO II Benjamin Beckford in place of Defendant CO II Forbes, and CO II Aurelio Sanchez-Cepeda in place of Defendant A. Sanchez. Because the assigned District Judge has already determined that Plaintiff's allegations sufficiently allege Eighth Amendment excessive force claims, no further screening of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint is necessary.
Plaintiff must pay the unpaid balance of the filing fee within 120 days of his release. Also, within 30 days of his release, he must either (1) notify the Court that he intends to pay the balance or (2) show good cause, in writing, why he cannot. Failure to comply may result in dismissal of this action.
B. Address Changes
Plaintiff must file and serve a notice of change of address in accordance with Rule 83.3(d) of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff must not include a motion for other relief with a notice of change of address. Failure to comply may result in dismissal of this action.
Because Plaintiff is currently confined in ASPC-Eyman and this case is subject to General Order 13-19, Plaintiff is not required to serve Defendants with a copy of every document he files or submit an additional copy of every filing for use by the Court as is ordinarily required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5 and Local Rule ("LRCiv") 5.4. If Plaintiff is transferred to a prison other than ASPC-Eyman, he will be notified of the requirements ...