United States District Court, N.D. California
October 25, 2005.
ASSOCIATES OF FAITH and HARVEY BLIGHT, Plaintiffs,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA, THOMAS ORVIS, STATE BAR, Defendants.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: MAXINE CHESNEY, District Judge
ORDER DISMISSING ACTION
In the above-titled action, plaintiffs seek to proceed in forma
pauperis. In an order filed July 29, 2005, the Court dismissed
the complaint with leave to amend. The Court found plaintiffs had
violated Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by
failing to adequately allege a basis for the Court's
jurisdiction, and by failing to include a prayer for relief. The
Court further found that to the extent plaintiffs were seeking a
writ of habeas corpus, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, they had
failed to adequately allege they were in custody in violation of
the Constitution or law or treaties of the United States, or that
they had exhausted all remedies available to them in state court.
Consequently, the Court dismissed the action, pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), and afforded plaintiffs leave to file an
amended complaint no later than August 26, 2005. On August 18, 2005, rather than file an amended complaint,
plaintiffs filed an appeal with the Ninth Circuit Court of
Appeals.*fn1 On September 21, 2005, the Ninth Circuit
dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. In an order filed
the following day, September 22, 2005, the Court extended to
October 14, 2005 the deadline for plaintiffs to file an amended
complaint. The Court further ordered that if plaintiffs failed to
file an amended complaint by that date, the Court would dismiss
the action with prejudice. To date, plaintiffs have not filed an
Accordingly, plaintiffs' motion to proceed in forma pauperis is
hereby DENIED and the instant action is hereby DISMISSED with
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2005 VersusLaw Inc.