Bishop v. Reyes
Filing
11
ORDER dismissing without prejudice Plaintiff's 10 Amended Complaint. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate this action. Signed by Magistrate Judge Eileen S Willett on 6/30/2016. (ATD)
1
WO
2
3
4
5
6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
8
9
Shirley Bishop,
Plaintiff,
10
11
ORDER
v.
12
No. CV-16-00009-PHX-ESW
Frank Reyes, et al.,
13
Defendants.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Plaintiff has consented to the exercise of Magistrate Judge jurisdiction (Doc. 7).
Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (Doc. 10). The Court,
however, must screen the Amended Complaint (Doc. 10) before it is allowed to be
served. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). As the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has explained,
“section 1915(e) not only permits but requires a district court to dismiss an in forma
pauperis complaint that fails to state a claim.” Lopez v. Smith, 203 F. 3d 1122, 1127 (9th
Cir. 2000).
In the Court’s Order (Doc. 9) filed on May 19, 2016, the Court identified the
deficiencies of Plaintiff’s original Complaint (Doc. 1). The Court set forth the
requirements of Rule 8, Fed. R. Civ. P., as well as the law involving the filing of a claim
for relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The Court has reviewed Plaintiff’s Amended
Complaint (Doc. 10). The Court finds that Plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which
relief may be granted. See Rizzo v. Goode, 423 U.S. 362, 371-72, 377 (1976). Plaintiff
has failed to cure the deficiencies noted in the original Complaint. The Court will
1
dismiss Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (Doc. 10) without prejudice.
CONCLUSION
2
3
For the reasons set forth above,
4
IT IS ORDERED dismissing without prejudice Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint
5
(Doc. 10).
6
7
8
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED directing the Clerk of Court to terminate this
action.
Dated this 30th day of June, 2016.
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?