Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-00173/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-00173-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 370
Nature of Suit: Other Fraud
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RONALD WILLIAM GILL,

Plaintiff,

v.

RONALD ALBERS, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 15-cv-00173-JST 

ORDER DISMISSING AMENDED 

COMPLAINT UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 

1915(E)(2)(B)

Re: ECF No. 15

Pro se Plaintiff Ronald William Gill previously filed a complaint, ECF No. 1, and an 

application to proceed in forma pauperis. ECF No. 2. Judge Spero granted the motion for leave to 

proceed in forma pauperis, ECF No. 6, but issued a report and recommendation that recommended 

that the Court dismiss the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915. ECF No. 7. Because Plaintiff 

declined to consent to magistrate jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(c), the case was 

reassigned to the undersigned. The Court adopted the report and recommendation in full and 

dismissed the complaint with leave to amend. ECF No. 13. 

Plaintiff has now filed an Amended Complaint. ECF No. 15. The Amended Complaint 

fails to address the deficiencies enumerated in Judge Spero’s thorough report and 

recommendation. The Court still cannot discern an arguable basis in law or fact from the 

complaint, see Jackson v. Arizona, 885 F.2d 639, 640-41 (9th Cir. 1999), superseded by statute on 

other grounds as stated in Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1130 (9th Cir.2000). The Court 

therefore dismisses the Complaint with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 

41(b).

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

Case 3:15-cv-00173-JST Document 16 Filed 03/26/15 Page 1 of 2
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

The Court also denies Plaintiff’s Motion for Permission for Electronic Case Filing, ECF 

No. 3, as moot. The Clerk shall close the file. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 26, 2015

______________________________________

JON S. TIGAR

United States District Judge

Case 3:15-cv-00173-JST Document 16 Filed 03/26/15 Page 2 of 2