Nicholaw v. Board of Supervisors

Filing 8

ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT. Signed by Judge Joseph C. Spero on November 22, 2011. (jcslc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/22/2011) (Additional attachment(s) added on 11/22/2011: # 1 Cert Serve) (klhS, COURT STAFF).

1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
6
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
7
8
ANDY NICHOLAW,

No. C-11-4272 JCS

9
Plaintiff,
ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT
v.
11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS,
12
13

Defendants.
_________________________________

14
15

Plaintiff Andy Nicholaw has filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis. He has

16

consented to the jurisdiction of a United States magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). On

17

October 14, 2011, the Court granted Plaintiff’s application, finding him indigent. However, the

18

Complaint was dismissed with leave to amend for failure to state a claim.

19

On October 19, 2011, Plaintiff timely filed a First Amended Complaint. Pursuant to 28

20

U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), the Court is required to dismiss an in forma pauperis complaint that fails to

21

state a claim. Marks v. Solcum, 98 F.3d 494, 495 (9th Cir. 1996). As with the initial Complaint, the

22

Court is unable to discern any legally cognizable claim in Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint.

23

Despite the Court’s admonishment to provide specific facts that support the claims, the First

24

Amended Complaint contains bare recitations of legal standards, with no facts in support.

25

//

26

//

27

//

28

1

1

Therefore, the Court DISMISSES Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint.

2

The Clerk shall close the file.

3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

4

DATED: November 22, 2011

5

______________________________
JOSEPH C. SPERO
United States Magistrate Judge

6
7
8
9

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

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

2