Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-00341/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-00341-1/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

JDN

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Christopher Lee Tindall, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Kmart Corporation, et al., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 05-0341-PHX-DGC (JRI)

ORDER

On December 19, 2005, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Reinstate Case (Dkt. # 8). In his

Motion Plaint iff requests leave to amend his civil rights Complaint and permission to

proceed with the action. He argues that, as a pro se litigant, he is entitled to an

opportunity to amend or correct his pleadings.

Plaintiff filed his Complaint (Dkt. # 1) on January 28, 2005. By Order dated

November 10, 2005 (Dkt. # 6), Plaintiff's Complaint was dismissed for failure to state a claim.

The Clerk's Judgment (Dkt. # 7) was entered on t he same day. As stated in its Order,

Plaintiff's Complaint was improperly brought pursuant to § 1983 because the named

Defendants were not acting under color of state law. Conduct of a defendant acting under

color of state law is a required element in a § 1983 claim. Leave t o amend the Complaint is

futile because the Defendants are private actors; the defect cannot be corrected. 

Case 2:05-cv-00341-DGC--JRI Document 9 Filed 02/02/06 Page 1 of 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

- 2 -

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff's M otion to Reinstate Case (Dkt. # 8)

is denied. 

DATED this 31st day of January, 2006.

Case 2:05-cv-00341-DGC--JRI Document 9 Filed 02/02/06 Page 2 of 2