Desilva v. Lore

Filing 13

ORDER - This action is DISMISSED without prejudice. Signed by Judge Larry R. Hicks on 12/18/12. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JK)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 8 *** ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 9 DAVID KEITH DESILVA, 10 Plaintiff, 11 v. 12 PAUL LORE, 13 Defendant. 3:12-cv-0318-LRH-WGC ORDER 14 15 Plaintiff David Keith DeSilva (“DeSilva”) initiated the underlying action for a civil rights 16 violation and for injunctive relief against defendant Paul Lore (“Lore”) in state court alleging that 17 Lore attacked him at the Reno Veteran’s Administration medical facility. In response, Lore 18 removed this action to federal court and filed a motion to dismiss arguing that the court lacked 19 jurisdiction over this action pursuant to the derivative jurisdiction doctrine. See Doc. #5. 20 On October 30, 2012, the court denied the motion to dismiss finding that “dismissal would 21 be a waste of judicial time and resources because this action is now before a court that can hear the 22 merits of the complaint.” Doc. #11. However, the court also found that the complaint was wholly 23 insufficient as DeSilva failed to identify any claim for relief or cause of action. 24 court granted DeSilva fifteen (15) days to file an amended complaint “that clearly identifies and 25 sets out specific causes of action.” Id. 26 Id. Therefore, the DeSilva has failed to file an amended complaint or otherwise comply with the court’s 1 October 30, 2012 order. See Doc. #12. As such, the court shall dismiss this action without 2 prejudice. 3 4 5 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that this action, 3:12-cv-0318, is DISMISSED without prejudice. 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 DATED this 18th day of December, 2012. 8 __________________________________ LARRY R. HICKS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 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?