Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_15-cv-01262/USCOURTS-casd-3_15-cv-01262-4/pdf.json

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

---

1

15cv1262-GPC-WVG

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

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARIO RICHARD MADRID,

CDCR No. AX-3761

Plaintiff,

v.

COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, et al.,

Defendant.

Case No.: 15cv1262-GPC-WVG

ORDER DISMISSING CIVIL 

ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE

On June 4, 2015, Mario Richard Madrid (“Plaintiff”), currently incarcerated at the 

Corcoran State Prison, and proceeding pro se, filed a civil rights complaint (“Compl.”) 

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, along with a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (“IFP”) 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). (ECF Nos. 1, 2.)

On July 15, 2015, this Court conducted the required sua sponte screening and 

dismissed Plaintiff’s Complaint for failing to state a claim and for seeking monetary 

damages against immune defendants pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2) & 1915A(b). 

(ECF No. 5.) Plaintiff was granted forty–five (45) days to file an amended pleading 

which cured the deficiencies of pleading identified by the Court. (Id.)

Case 3:15-cv-01262-GPC-WVG Document 20 Filed 05/18/16 Page 1 of 2
2

15cv1262-GPC-WVG

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

On September 16, 2015, Plaintiff filed his First Amended Complaint (“FAC”). 

(ECF No. 11.) The Court, once again, conducted the required sua sponte screening and 

dismissed Plaintiff’s FAC for failing to state a claim on November 16, 2015. (ECF No. 

14.) Plaintiff was given sixty (60) days to file an amended pleading. (Id.) Plaintiff filed 

a motion for reconsideration of the Court’s Order which was denied. (ECF Nos. 16, 19.) 

However, Plaintiff also sought an extension of time to file his amended pleading which 

the Court granted on February 2, 2016 and gave Plaintiff an additional sixty (60) days to 

file his amended pleading. (ECF Nos. 18, 19.) 

That date has since passed without Plaintiff filing an amended pleading; therefore, 

his case must now be dismissed.

Conclusion and Order

Accordingly, because Plaintiff has failed to comply with the Court’s Order 

directing him to file a Second Amended Complaint, the Court hereby DISMISSES this 

civil action without prejudice for failing to comply with a Court Order and for the reasons 

set forth in the Court’s November 16, 2015 Order.

The Clerk of Court is directed to close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 18, 2016

Case 3:15-cv-01262-GPC-WVG Document 20 Filed 05/18/16 Page 2 of 2