Olivas v. State of Nevada, ex rel
Filing
23
ORDER that 11 Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint is RESTORED as the operative complaint in this case.FURTHER ORDERED that, should plaintiff wish to further amend his complaint, he shall submit a corresponding motion for leave to amend the complaint within thirty (30) days of the date of this order. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 6/15/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
6
***
7
DARIO OLIVAS,
8
Plaintiff(s),
9
10
Case No. 2:14-CV-1801 JCM (VCF)
ORDER
v.
STATE OF NEVADA, ex rel,
11
Defendant(s).
12
13
Presently before the court is the May 19, 2017, opinion of the Ninth Circuit Court of
14
Appeals reversing and remanding the judgment based upon the September 23, 2015, screening
15
order dismissing the second amended complaint. Olivas v. Nevada ex rel. Dep’t of Corr., 856 F.3d
16
1281 (9th Cir. 2017); see also (ECF Nos. 11, 14, 15).
17
Because “the screening requirement of 28 U.S.C. § 1915A does not apply to [plaintiff’s]
18
claims,” the case will be reopened and the second amended complaint will be restored as the
19
operative complaint. Olivas, 856 F.3d at 1284; see also (ECF No. 11).
20
Accordingly,
21
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that plaintiff’s second
22
amended complaint (ECF No. 11) be, and the same hereby is, RESTORED as the operative
23
complaint in this case.
24
...
25
...
26
...
27
...
28
...
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge
1
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, should plaintiff wish to further amend his complaint, he
2
shall submit a corresponding motion for leave to amend the complaint within thirty (30) days of
3
the date of this order.
4
5
6
DATED June 15, 2017.
__________________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge
-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?