Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-05489/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-05489-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

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

JOSEPH B. GASKINS,

Plaintiff,

v.

ANTERO RESOURCES CORPORATION,

Defendant.

Case No. 14-cv-05489-JST (PR) 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

On December 16, 2014, plaintiff Joseph Gaskins, an inmate at Salinas Valley State Prison, 

filed a document captioned as a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus. The pleading, however, 

did not challenge his conviction or sentence, but rather, alleged a right to proceeds from real 

property in West Virginia being leased by defendant Antero Resources Corporation. On February 

2, 2015, this Court dismissed the complaint with leave to amend for plaintiff to demonstrate that 

the Court has either federal question or diversity jurisdiction over his complaint, which appeared 

only to plead state law causes of action. Specifically, the Court understood plaintiff to be 

asserting a state law claim as a beneficiary of the estate of his deceased father.

The Court warned plaintiff that a failure to file an amended complaint within thirty days

would result in dismissal of this action. More than thirty days have passed, and plaintiff has not

filed an amended complaint. 

Plaintiff has filed various letters clarifying that the action does not involve a will or estate. 

The Court cannot consider as part of plaintiff's pleadings in this matter any information sent to the 

Court in a letter or any other document that is not a pleading signed under penalty of perjury. In 

Case 3:14-cv-05489-JST Document 17 Filed 03/17/15 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

any event, the letters do not cure the pleading deficiencies identified in the Court's February 2, 

2015 order of dismissal with leave to amend.1

Accordingly, this case is DISMISSED without prejudice. The Clerk shall terminate all 

pending motions, enter judgment, and close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 17, 2015

______________________________________

JON S. TIGAR

United States District Judge

 

1 Although plaintiff asserts diversity jurisdiction by way of a civil cover sheet (see dkt. no. 14 at 

4), he fails to plead a matter in controversy exceeding $75,000.

Case 3:14-cv-05489-JST Document 17 Filed 03/17/15 Page 2 of 2