Rodriguez v. Palmero

Filing 9

ORDER DISMISSING CASE with prejudice, for failure to state a claim signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 10/27/2015. CASE CLOSED.(Lundstrom, T)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 12 CHARLIE RODRIGUEZ, 13 Plaintiff, 14 v. 15 PALMERO, M.D., et al., 16 Case No. 1:14-cv-01742 DLB PC ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITH PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO TERMINATE ACTION Defendants. 17 Plaintiff Charlie Rodriguez (“Plaintiff”) is a California state prisoner proceeding pro se and 18 19 in forma pauperis in this civil action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed this action on 20 November 7, 2014.1 He names Palmero, M.D., as Defendant. On September 8, 2015, the Court screened the complaint and determined that Plaintiff failed 21 22 to state a claim upon which relief may be granted under Section 1983. Plaintiff was provided an 23 opportunity to file an amended complaint and he was directed to file the amended complaint within 24 thirty (30) days. Akhtar v. Mesa, 698 F.3d 1202, 1212-13 (9th Cir. 2012). Over thirty days have 25 passed and Plaintiff has failed to file an amended complaint or otherwise communicate with the 26 Court. Plaintiff was forewarned: “If Plaintiff fails to file an amended complaint in compliance with 27 this order, this action will be dismissed, with prejudice, for failure to state a claim.” 28 1 Plaintiff consented to the jurisdiction of the Magistrate Judge on December 8, 2014. 1 1 2 3 4 Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Plaintiff’s complaint is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE for failure to state a claim under section 1983; 2. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to terminate this action in its entirety. 5 6 7 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: /s/ Dennis October 27, 2015 L. Beck UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 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?