Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-00631/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-00631-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

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 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BRADY ARMSTRONG,

Plaintiff,

vs.

M. MARTINEZ, ET AL.,

Defendant

Case No.1:12 cv 00631 LJO GSA PC

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION 

THAT THIS ACTION BE DISMISSED FOR 

FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM UPON 

WHICH RELIEF COULD BE GRANTED

OBJECTIONS DUE IN TWENTY DAYS

Plaintiff is a former state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action . The 

matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and 

Local Rule 302. 

By order filed June 13, 2014, the Court issued an order dismissing the operative 

complaint for failure to state a claim and directing Plaintiff to file an amended complaint within 

thirty days. Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint.

In the June 13, 2014, order, the Court informed Plaintiff of the deficiencies in his 

complaint, and dismissed the complaint on the ground that Plaintiff had failed to state a claim 

upon which relief could be granted. Because Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint, the 

Case 1:12-cv-00631-LJO-GSA Document 21 Filed 07/25/14 Page 1 of 3
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 2

Court dismisses the claims made in the original complaint with prejudice for failure to state a 

claim upon which the Court could grant relief. See Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1127 (9th Cir. 

2007)(recognizing longstanding rule that leave to amend should be granted even if no request to 

amend was made 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). See Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 

F.2d 1258, 1261 (9th Cir. 1992)(dismissal with prejudice upheld where court had instructed 

plaintiff regarding deficiencies in prior order dismissing claim with leave to amend).

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed for failure 

to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, and that this action count as a strike under 28 

U.S.C. §1915(g).

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S. C. § 636(b)(1)(B). Within twenty 

days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written 

objections with the Court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate 

Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections 

within the specified time waives all objections to the judge’s findings of fact. See Turner v. 

Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1988). 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.

Case 1:12-cv-00631-LJO-GSA Document 21 Filed 07/25/14 Page 2 of 3
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 3

Dated: July 25, 2014 

/s/ Gary S. Austin 

 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:12-cv-00631-LJO-GSA Document 21 Filed 07/25/14 Page 3 of 3