Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_03-cv-05814/USCOURTS-caed-1_03-cv-05814-7/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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOHNNY GRAY, JR.,

Plaintiff,

v.

GOVERNOR GRAY DAVIS, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:03-CV-5814-AWI-SMS-P

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION, WITHOUT

PREJUDICE

(Docs. 66 and 67)

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF THE COURT

TO CLOSE THIS FILE

Plaintiff Johnny Gray (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis

in this civil action. On July 15, 2005, the undersigned issued an order directing, in relevant part, that

this action proceed on Plaintiff’s second amended complaint, filed May 31, 2005, against Defendant

Jane Doe under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violation of the Eighth Amendment, and against Defendant

Barnett, an inmate, under state law for violation of section 1708.5 of the California Civil Code.

(Doc. 66.) The matter was referred back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings. (Id.) 

On August 8, 2005, the Magistrate Judge issued an order opening discovery for the limited

purpose of allowing Plaintiff to attempt to identify Defendant Jane Doe. (Doc. 67.) Plaintiff was

ordered to notify the Court of Defendant Doe’s identity within one-hundred twenty days and warned

that dismissal of this action would result if he did not do so. (Id.) Plaintiff was also notified that in

accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a), the Court would not exercise supplemental jurisdiction over

his state law tort claim against inmate Barnett until and unless Plaintiff was able to identify 

///

Case 1:03-cv-05814-AWI -SMS Document 68 Filed 03/03/06 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

Defendant Jane Doe. (Id.) More than one-hundred twenty days have passed and Plaintiff has not

provided the identity of Defendant Doe or otherwise been in contact with the Court.

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s state law tort claim against Defendant Barnett is dismissed, without

prejudice; and

2. Plaintiff’s federal claim against Defendant Doe is dismissed based on Plaintiff’s

failure to identify her so that service may be effected, thus concluding this action in

its entirety; and

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

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 3, 2006 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:03-cv-05814-AWI -SMS Document 68 Filed 03/03/06 Page 2 of 2