Davila v. Smith

Filing 23

ORDER FOLLOWING APPEAL; ORDER DISMISSING Federal Claims with Prejudice for Failure to State a Claim and Dismissing State Law Claims without Prejudice signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 05/15/2017. CASE CLOSED.(Flores, E)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 CHARLES DAVILA, 11 Plaintiff, ORDER FOLLOWING APPEAL Defendant. ORDER DISMISSING FEDERAL CLAIMS WITH PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM AND DISMISSING STATE LAW CLAIMS WITHOUT PREJUDICE 12 13 14 1:15-cv-00094-LJO-EPG-PC vs. D. SMITH, 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Plaintiff Charles Davila (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed the Complaint commencing this action on January 20, 2015. (ECF No. 1.) Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint on June 25, 2015. (ECF No. 10.) On July 26, 2016, the assigned Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendations pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) that Plaintiff’s federal claims dismissed with prejudice, and Plaintiff’s state claims dismissed without prejudice. (ECF No. 12). Plaintiff objected to the Findings and Recommendation on August 11, 2016. (EF No. 13.) The Findings and Recommendations were adopted in full by the undersigned judge on August 19, 2016. (ECF No. 14.) The Order adopting the Findings and Recommendations stated that “[t]his action is dismissed, with prejudice, based on Plaintiff’s failure to state a claim 28 1 1 upon which relief may be granted under § 1983” (Id.) Plaintiff filed a notice of appeal on 2 August 26, 2016. (ECF No. 16.) 3 On March 21, 2017, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued a 4 Memorandum affirming in part, vacating in part, and remanding the case. (ECF No. 21.) The 5 Ninth Circuit held that this Court properly dismissed Plaintiff’s federal claims and did not 6 abuse its discretion in refusing to exercise supplemental jurisdiction of Plaintiff’s state law 7 claims. (Id. at 2-3) However, the Ninth Circuit vacated the judgment “to the extent it dismisses 8 Davila’s state law claims with prejudice” and remanded the case “for the sole purpose of 9 dismissing the state law claims without prejudice.” (Id. at 3.) 10 Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS as follows: 11 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 1915A and 28 U.S.C. ' 1915(e), this action is dismissed for 12 failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted under § 1983, with Plaintiff’s federal 13 claims dismissed with prejudice, and Plaintiff’s state claims dismissed without prejudice. 14 15 16 17 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____ May 15, 2017 UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE 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?