Flournoy v. County of Contra Costa et al

Filing 10

ORDER OF DISMISSAL. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 1/11/2022. (ls, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/11/2022)Any non-CM/ECF Participants have been served by First Class Mail to the addresses of record listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9

JAMES HENRY FLOURNOY, P00154293,
Plaintiff,

10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14

Case No. 21-cv-06990-CRB (PR)
ORDER OF DISMISSAL

v.
COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, et al.,
Defendant(s).

Plaintiff, a prisoner at the Marin County Jail (MCJ) facing parole revocation proceedings

15

on prior criminal convictions (as well as pretrial proceedings on new criminal charges), filed a pro

16

se complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging various violations of his federal civil rights against

17

several officials at the Contra Costa County Jail (CCCJ), where he was formerly incarcerated.

18

Plaintiff specifically claims sexual harassment, motor vehicle negligence, medical

19

malpractice/deliberate indifference and use of excessive force by different officials at CCCJ.

20

On November 30, 2021, the court screened the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A

21

and dismissed it (1) with leave to amend to file an amended complaint regarding plaintiff’s claim

22

that deputy sheriffs Miller and Battles sexually harassed, and (2) without prejudice to plaintiff

23
24
25
26
27
28

filing separate actions regarding his other three claims. As to plaintiff’s sexual harassment claim,
the court explained that plaintiff must “set forth specific facts showing that the alleged sexual
harassment by deputy sheriffs Miller and Battles was sufficiently harmful, egregious, pervasive
and/or widespread to implicate the Eighth Amendment, if possible.” ECF No. 7 at 3. The court
also warned plaintiff that “[f]ailure to file a proper amended complaint within [28 days] will result
in the dismissal of this action.” Id. at 4.

1

More than 40 days have passed since the court’s November 30, 2021 order and plaintiff

2

has neither filed an amended complaint nor sought an extension of time to do so. This action

3

accordingly is DISMISSED without prejudice.

4

The clerk is instructed to close the file and terminate all pending motions as moot.

5

IT IS SO ORDERED.

6
7
8

Dated: January 11, 2022
______________________________________
CHARLES R. BREYER
United States District Judge

9
10

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