White v. Hartley et al

Filing 9

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION, signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 2/19/2013. CASE CLOSED. (Marrujo, C)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10
11
12
13
14
15

RONALD LEE WHITE,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
JAMES HARTLEY, et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
____________________________________)

NO. 1:12-cv-00857-GSA-PC
ORDER DISMISSING ACTION

16
17

Plaintiff is a former state prisoner proceeding pro se. Plaintiff seeks relief pursuant to 42

18

U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff has consented to magistrate judge jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

19

636(c)(1).

20

By order filed December 6, 1012, the operative complaint was dismissed for failure to

21

state a claim. On December 26, 2012, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Change of Address, indicting his

22

release from custody. On January 15, 2013, Plaintiff was granted a thirty day extension of time

23

in which to file an amended complaint. Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint.

24

In the December 6, 1012, order the Court informed Plaintiff of the deficiencies in his

25

complaint, and dismissed the complaint on the ground that Plaintiff had failed to state a claim

26

upon which relief could be granted. Because Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint, the

27

Court dismisses the claims made in the original complaint with prejudice for failure to state a

28

federal claim upon which the court could grant relief. See Noll v. Carlson, 809 F. 2d 1446, 1448

1

(9th Cir. 1987) (prisoner must be given notice of deficiencies and opportunity to amend prior to

2

dismissing for failure to state a claim).

3
4

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action is dismissed for failure to state
a claim upon which relief can be granted. The Clerk is directed to close this case.

5
6
7
8
9
10

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
6i0kij

February 19, 2013

/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2