Dryden v. Barefield

Filing 26

ORDER that 11 Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall enter judgment and close the case. Signed by Judge Robert C. Jones on 2/10/15. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)

Download PDF
1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 5 6 _____________________________________ 7 JEFFREY R. DRYDEN, 8 Plaintiff, 9 10 11 vs. ANDREA E. BAREFIELD, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 2:13-cv-01896-RCJ-PAL ORDER 12 13 Plaintiff Jeffrey Dryden sued Defendant Andrea Barefield in pro se in this Court for 14 various constitutional violations. The Magistrate Judge granted the motion to proceed in forma 15 pauperis and screened the Complaint, dismissing with leave to amend. Plaintiff filed two 16 versions of the Amended Complaint, and the Magistrate Judge screened the second, more 17 detailed, version. Defendant filed a motion to dismiss. A response was due on January 2, 2015. 18 The Court adopted the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, dismissing all claims, 19 except one due process claim. The Court granted a timely stipulation to extend the time to 20 respond to the motion to dismiss to January 8, 2015. Plaintiff filed a further amended version of 21 the Complaint, which the Magistrate Judge struck for lack of leave to file it. Plaintiff’s response 22 23 24 1 of 2 1 to the motion to dismiss is twenty-six days late as of this writing. Plaintiff has consented to the 2 grant of the motion by failing to oppose it. See Local R. 7-2(d). CONCLUSION 3 4 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 11) is GRANTED. 5 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall enter judgment and close the case. 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 Dated this 10th of of February, 2015. Dated this 3rd daydayFebruary, 2015. 8 9 10 _____________________________________ ROBERT C. JONES United States District Judge 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2 of 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?