Contreras v. Herrera
||April 11, 2018
||California Southern District Court
||San Diego Office
||Michael M. Anello
||Andrew G. Schopler
|Nature of Suit:
||Prisoner: Civil Rights
|Cause of Action:
||42:1983pr Prisoner Civil Rights
|Jury Demanded By:
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|December 13, 2018
CLERK'S JUDGMENT. The Court dismisses this civil action in its entirety without prejudice based on Plaintiff's failure to state a claim upon which § 1983 relief can be granted pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) and § 1915A(b), and because he has failed to prosecute as required by Court's 10/4/2018 Order requiring amendment. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(rmc)
|October 15, 2018
ORDER (1) Granting 4 Plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Time and 6 Renewed Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis and (2) Dismissing Complaint for Failing to State a Claim Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) and 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). The Secretary CDCR, or his designee, is ordered to collect from prison trust account the $8.16 initial filing fee assessed, if those funds are available at the time this Order is executed, and to forward whatever balance remains of the full 36;350 owed in monthly payments in an amount equal to 20% of the preceding month income credited to the account and forward payments to the Clerk of the Court each time the amount in the account exceeds $10 in accordance with 28 USC 1915(b) (2). The Court dismisses Plaintiff's Complaint for failing to state a claim upon which relief may be granted pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) and § 1915A(b)(1), and grants him 45 days leave from the date of this Order in whic h to file an Amended Complaint which cures the deficiencies of pleading noted. If Plaintiff fails to file an Amended Complaint within 45 days, the Court will enter a final Order dismissing this civil action based both on his failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) and 1915A(b)(1), and his failure to prosecute in compliance with a court order requiring amendment. Signed by Judge Michael M. Anello on 10/15/2018. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(Order electronically transmitted to Secretary of CDCR and mailed to Acting Secretary, CDCR) (rmc)
|April 23, 2018
Order Dismissing Civil Action Without Prejudice for Failing to Pay Filing Fee Required by 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) and/or Failing to Move to Proceed in Forma Pauperis Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). The Court dismisses this action sua sponte wi thout prejudice for failure to pay the $400 civil filing and administrative fee or to submit a Motion to Proceed IFP pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914(a) and 1915(a); and grants Plaintiff 45 days leave from the date this Order is filed to: (a) prepay the entire $400 civil filing and administrative fee in full; or (b) complete and file a Motion to Proceed IFP which includes a certified copy of his prison trust account statements for the 6-month period preceding the filing of his C omplaint. The Court further directs the Clerk of the Court to provide Plaintiff with the Court's approved form "Motion and Declaration in Support of Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis." If Plaintiff fails to either prepay the $40 0 civil filing fee or fully complete and submit the enclosed Motion to Proceed IFP within 45 days, this action will remain dismissed without prejudice based on his failure to satisfy 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a)'s fee requirement and without further Order of the Court. Signed by Judge Michael M. Anello on 4/23/2018.(All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(rmc)(Blank IFP form mailed)
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system.
A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
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?