Peyton v. Grounds
Filing
13
ORDER DISMISSING CASE. Signed by Judge Vince Chhabria on 6/9/2014. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(knm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/9/2014)
1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
6
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
7
8
9
10
LEE EDWARD PEYTON,
Case No. 13-4232-VC (PR)
Plaintiff,
11
United States District Court
Northern District of California
v.
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
12
13
RANDY GROUNDS,
Defendant.
14
15
16
Lee Edward Peyton, an inmate at Kern Valley State Prison proceeding pro se, filed a civil
17
rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Randy Grounds, Warden at Salinas Valley
18
State Prison, where Peyton was formerly incarcerated. The Court dismissed Peyton’s original
19
complaint with leave to amend so that he could exhaust administrative remedies. On March 10,
20
2014, Peyton filed a first amended complaint. On May 8, 2014, the Court reviewed Peyton’s first
21
amended complaint and dismissed it with leave to amend within twenty-one days from the date of
22
the Order. The Court notified Peyton that failure to file a second amended complaint within
23
twenty-one days would result in the dismissal of his action.
24
More than twenty-one days have passed and Peyton has not filed a second amended
25
complaint. Therefore, this action is dismissed without leave to amend but without prejudice to
26
filing a paid complaint.
27
28
CONCLUSION
1
2
Based on the foregoing, the Court orders as follows:
3
1. Peyton’s complaint is dismissed without leave to amend and without prejudice to filing a
4
paid complaint.
5
2. The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment and close the file.
6
IT IS SO ORDERED.
7
8
9
10
Dated: June 9, 2014
______________________________________
VINCE CHHABRIA
United States District Judge
United States District Court
Northern District of California
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?