Padilla v. Hartley et al

Filing 11

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION signed by District Judge John A. Houston on 4/24/2009. CASE CLOSED(Figueroa, O)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA FRESNO DIVISION

MARIO PADILLA, CDCR #C-89816, Plaintiff, vs. J.D. HARTLEY, Warden, Defendant.

Civil No.

08-0929 JAH (BLM)

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION

I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY On July 2, 2008, Plaintiff, an inmate currently incarcerated at Avenal State Prison located in Avenal, California and proceeding pro se, filed a civil rights Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff did not prepay the $350 filing fee mandated by 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) to commence a civil action; instead, he filed a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis ("IFP") pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) [Doc. No. 2]. The Court granted Plaintiff's Motion to Proceed IFP on July 10, 2008 [Doc. No. 4]. In addition, Plaintiff filed a Motion For Temporary Restraining Order [Doc. No. 1]. On November
-108cv0929

K:\COMMON\EVERYONE\_EFILE-PROSE\JAH\08cv0929-Case Dismissal

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

25, 2008, this matter was reassigned to District Judge John Houston for all further proceedings [Doc. No. 6]. The Court denied Plaintiff's Motion for Temporary Restraining Order on January 15, 2009 and simultaneously dismissed Plaintiff's Complaint for failing to state a claim upon which relief could be granted pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2) and 1915(A)(b). See Jan. 15, 2009 Order at 7-8. Nonetheless, the Court granted Plaintiff leave to file an Amended Complaint in order to correct the deficiencies of pleading identified in the Court's Order. Id. Plaintiff filed his First Amended Complaint ("FAC") on February 25, 2009. On March 5, 2009, this Court dismissed Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint without prejudice for failing to state a claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) & § 1915A(b). Plaintiff was granted thirty (30) days leave to file a Second Amended Complaint. That time has passed and Plaintiff has not filed an Amended Complaint. II. CONCLUSION AND ORDER Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: This action is DISMISSED without prejudice for all the reasons stated in the Court's previous Order and for failing to comply with the Court's March 5, 2009 Order. The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly and close the file.

DATED: April 24, 2009 HON. JOHN A. HOUSTON United States District Judge

K:\COMMON\EVERYONE\_EFILE-PROSE\JAH\08cv0929-Case Dismissal

-2-

08cv0929