Wick v. Angelea et al

Filing 62

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 07/19/11 ORDERING that the 57 , 58 Motions for Clarification are GRANTED and McClelland's 56 Motion to Dismiss is premature and is DENIED w/o prejudice. (Benson, A.)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 ERIC WICK, Plaintiff, 9 10 vs. 11 No. CIV S-09-1027 EFB P ANGELEA, et al., 12 Defendants. / 13 14 ORDER Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 15 U.S.C. § 1983. Currently pending is defendant McClelland’s motion to dismiss this action 16 against him. Dckt. No. 56. Because McClelland filed the motion to dismiss before the court 17 screened the amended complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, both plaintiff and defendants 18 Grannis, Mejia, Hirai, Angalea, Guitierrez and Monroe requested clarification from the court as 19 to whether the court would screen plaintiff’s amended complaint. Dckt. Nos. 57, 58. 20 As noted in the November 23, 2010 order, the court must screen plaintiff’s amended 21 complaint pursuant to § 1915A. McClelland’s motion to dismiss is therefore premature. 22 Accordingly, the motions for clarification are granted and McClelland’s motion to dismiss is 23 denied without prejudice. The Clerk is directed to terminate docket entries nos. 56, 57 & 58. 24 25 26 So ordered. Dated: July 19, 2011.

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?