Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Gaston v. Redmon

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


April 28, 2010

ANTHONY GASTON, PLAINTIFF,
v.
TOMMY REDMON, DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sheila K. Oberto United States Magistrate Judge

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OBJECTIONS DUE WITHIN 30 DAYS

Plaintiff Anthony Gaston ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This proceeding was referred to this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Rule 302.

On February 11, 2010, the Court screened Plaintiff's complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. (Doc. 9.) The Court found that Plaintiff's complaint failed to state any claims upon which relief may be granted under Section 1983. Plaintiff's complaint was dismissed and Plaintiff was given leave to file an amended complaint within 30 days. On March 4, 2010 Plaintiff was granted a thirty (30) day extension of time to file his amended complaint. Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint.

The February 11, 2010 screening order informed Plaintiff of the deficiencies in his complaint. Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint and the Court will therefore recommend dismissal of the claims raised in Plaintiff's complaint with prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. See Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1127 (9th Cir. 2007) (recognizing longstanding rule that leave to amend should be granted unless the court determines that the pleading could not possibly be cured by the allegation of other facts); Noll v. Carlson, 809 F.2d 1446, 1448 (9th Cir. 1987) (pro se litigant must be given leave to amend his or her complaint unless it is absolutely clear that the deficiencies of the complaint could not be cured by amendment).

Accordingly, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.

These Findings and Recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within thirty (30) days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, any party may file written objections with the Court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Any reply to the objections shall be served and filed within ten (10) days after service of the objections. The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20100428

© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.