James v. United States Marshals Service Agents et al

Filing 19

ORDER DISMISSING CIVIL ACTION: The Court dismisses this action in its entirety without further leave to amend. The Clerk of Court shall close the file. Signed by Judge William Q. Hayes on 10/16/2017. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service.) (mdc)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 12 KYLE JAMES, CDCR #BB-1457, Case No. 3:17-cv-0414-WQH-BLM 13 vs. 14 15 16 17 18 ORDER DISMISSING CIVIL ACTION FOR FAILING TO STATE A CLAIM PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) AND FOR FAILING TO PROSECUTE IN COMPLIANCE WITH COURT ORDER REQUIRING AMENDMENT Plaintiff, UNITED STATES MARSHALS SERVICE AGENTS, K. LANEY; BROWN; JOHN BUCKLEY; JOHN DOES; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. UNITED STATES MARSHALS SERVICE , Defendants. 19 20 21 Kyle James (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se, and currently incarcerated at Corcoran 22 State Prison located in Corcoran, California, initially filed this civil rights action pursuant 23 to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on February 24, 2017. (ECF No. 1.) 24 I. 25 Procedural Background On August 18, 2017, the Court dismissed his Complaint sua sponte for failing to 26 state a claim upon which relief can be granted pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) and 27 denied his Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis as moot. (ECF No. 18). The Court 28 granted Plaintiff 45 days in which to file an Amended Complaint that cured these 1 3:17-cv-0414-WQH-BLM 1 pleading deficiencies. (Id. at 7-8; see Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1130 (9th Cir. 2000) 2 (en banc) (noting that leave to amend should be granted when complaint is dismissed sua 3 sponte under § 1915 “if it appears at all possible that the plaintiff can correct the 4 defect.”).) 5 That time has since passed and Plaintiff has filed no Amended Complaint; nor has 6 he requested an extension of time in which to do so. See Edwards v. Marin Park, 356 7 F.3d 1058, 1065 (9th Cir. 2004) (“The failure of the plaintiff eventually to respond to the 8 court’s ultimatum–either by amending the complaint or by indicating to the court that 9 [he] will not do so–is properly met with the sanction of a Rule 41(b) dismissal.”). 10 11 II. Conclusion and Order Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES this civil action in its entirety without further 12 leave to amend based on Plaintiff’s failure to state a claim upon which § 1983 relief can 13 be granted pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1), and his failure to prosecute pursuant to 14 FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b) in compliance with the Court’s August 8, 2017 Order (ECF No. 18). 15 The Clerk of Court shall close the file. 16 IT IS SO ORDERED. 17 Dated: October 16, 2017 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 3:17-cv-0414-WQH-BLM

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?