Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_19-cv-01610/USCOURTS-casd-3_19-cv-01610-1/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 

3:19-cv-01610-JAH-RBB 

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 

CHARLES EDWARD ALLEN, 

CDCR #D-76353 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

J. CARDENAS; RALPH M. DIAZ; 

W.L. MONTGOMERY; M. POLLARD; 

L. WOOD; M. CARRILLO, 

Defendants. 

 Case No.: 3:19-cv-01610-JAH-RBB 

ORDER DISMISSING CIVIL 

ACTION PURSUANT 

TO 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) AND 

§ 1915A(b) AND FOR FAILING 

TO PROSECUTE IN COMPLIANCE 

WITH COURT ORDER 

REQUIRING AMENDMENT 

I. Procedural History

On August 26, 2019, Plaintiff filed his civil rights Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 

§ 1983. See ECF No. 1. On September 27, 2019, the Court conducted the required sua 

sponte screening of Plaintiff’s Complaint and dismissed his Complaint for failing to state 

a claim. See ECF No. 11. Plaintiff was granted 30 days leave to file an amended complaint 

in order to correct the deficiencies of pleading identified by the Court. (Id.) 

Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint was due, on or before, October 27, 2019 but to date, 

Plaintiff has not filed an Amended Complaint, and has not requested an extension of time 

in which to do so. “The failure of the plaintiff eventually to respond to the court’s 

Case 3:19-cv-01610-JAH-RBB Document 17 Filed 01/06/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 2
2 

3:19-cv-01610-JAH-RBB 

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

ultimatum–either by amending the complaint or by indicating to the court that [he] will not 

do so–is properly met with the sanction of a Rule 41(b) dismissal.” Edwards v. Marin Park, 

356 F.3d 1058, 1065 (9th Cir. 2004). 

II. Conclusion and Order 

 Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES this civil action in its entirety without prejudice 

based on Plaintiff’s failure to state a claim upon which § 1983 relief can be granted and for 

seeking monetary damages against immune defendants pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1915(e)(2)(B) and § 1915A(b) and his failure to prosecute pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 

41(b) in compliance with the Court’s September 27, 2019 Order. 

The Court further CERTIFIES that an IFP appeal would not be taken in good faith 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) and DIRECTS the Clerk to enter a final judgment of 

dismissal and close the file. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: January 6, 2020 

Hon. John A. Houston 

United States District Judge 

Case 3:19-cv-01610-JAH-RBB Document 17 Filed 01/06/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 2