IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
February 12, 2007
KILEY CLAY-EL, INMATE #R00217, PLAINTIFF,
ROGER E. WALKER, JR., ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Herndon, District Judge
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This action was dismissed and judgment entered in favor of defendants on November 27, 2006, after the Court determined, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, that Plaintiff's pro se complaint failed to state a claim. On December 22, 2006, almost one month after the entry of judgment, Plaintiff filed an amended complaint.
A plaintiff may amend the pleadings after the entry of judgment, however, "the presumption in favor of liberality in granting motions to amend [under Rule 15(a)] is reversed after judgment has been entered." Rodriguez v. United States, 286 F.3d 972, 980 (7th Cir. 2002), quoting Vicom Inc. v. Harbridge Merchant Services Inc., 20 F.3d 771, 785 n. 13 (7th Cir. 1994). Where a plaintiff wishes to amend his complaint after judgment, he may do so only after the judgment has been vacated or set aside pursuant to either Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) or 60(b) and the case has been reopened. See Sparrow v. Heller, 116 F.3d 204, 205 (7th Cir. 1997). Failure to seek vacation of the judgment is grounds for denying the request for post-judgment amendment. Id., citing Diersen v. Chicago Car Exchange, 110 F.3d 481, 488 n.6 (7th Cir. 1997).
Plaintiff has not filed a motion to set aside the judgment, nor has he filed a motion to amend the complaint in accordance with the local rules.*fn1 Therefore, based on the aforementioned legal standards, Plaintiff's amended complaint (Doc. 24) is DISMISSED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
David RHerndon DISTRICT JUDGE