Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00128/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00128-3/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

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RUSSELL RODGERS, 

 Plaintiff,

 vs.

M. BOWEN, et al.,

 Defendants.

1:15-cv-00128-EPG-PC

ORDER DISMISSING CASE WITH

PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE TO STATE A 

CLAIM UPON WHICH RELIEF MAY BE 

GRANTED

(ECF No. 8.) 

ORDER THAT THIS DISMISSAL IS

SUBJECT TO THE “THREE STRIKES” 

PROVISION OF 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g)

ORDER FOR CLERK TO CLOSE CASE

Russell Rodgers (“Plaintiff”) is a prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with 

this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed the Complaint commencing 

this action on January 28, 2015. (ECF No. 1.) 

On February 19, 2015, Plaintiff consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction pursuant to 

28 U.S.C. § 636(c), and no other parties have made an appearance. (ECF No. 7.) Therefore, 

pursuant to Appendix A(k)(4) of the Local Rules of the Eastern District of California, the 

undersigned shall conduct any and all proceedings in the case until such time as reassignment 

to a District Judge is required. Local Rule Appendix A(k)(3). 

On February 19, 2015, Plaintiff voluntarily filed a First Amended Complaint. (ECF No. 

8.) On April 1, 2016, the Court dismissed Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint for failure to 

state a claim, with leave to file a Second Amended Complaint within thirty days. (ECF No. 

Case 1:15-cv-00128-EPG Document 12 Filed 08/16/16 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

10.) 28 U.S.C. § 1915A; 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). The thirty-day deadline expired, and Plaintiff 

did not file an amended complaint or otherwise respond to the Court’s order. As a result, there 

was no pleading on file which set forth any claims upon which relief may be granted.

On June 14, 2016, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause, requiring Plaintiff to 

respond within thirty days, showing cause why this case should not be dismissed, with 

prejudice, for failure to state a claim. (ECF No. 11.) The thirty-day deadline has expired, and 

Plaintiff has not responded to the order.

Plaintiff was forewarned in the Order to Show Cause that his “failure to comply with 

this order shall result in the dismissal of this case, with prejudice, for failure to state a claim.” 

(Id. at 2:9-10.) Accordingly, this case shall be dismissed with prejudice.

Based on the foregoing, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that:

1. This action is dismissed, with prejudice, for Plaintiff’s failure to state a claim 

upon which relief may be granted;

2. This dismissal is subject to the Athree-strikes@ provision set forth in 28 U.S.C. '

1915(g). Silva v. Vittorio, 658 F.3d 1090, 1098 (9th Cir. 2011); and

3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 16, 2016 /s/

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-00128-EPG Document 12 Filed 08/16/16 Page 2 of 2