Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-03151/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-03151-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Yohonia Martin
Plaintiff
Redwood City Dental Care
Defendant

Document Text:

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

YOHONIA MARTIN,

Plaintiff,

v.

REDWOOD CITY DENTAL CARE,

Defendant.

Case No. 15-cv-03151-JST 

ORDER DISMISSING AMENDED 

COMPLAINT UNDER 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1915(E)(2)(B)

Re: ECF Nos. 6, 7, 8

Pro se Plaintiff Yohonia Martin previously filed with the Court a complaint, ECF No. 1, 

and an application to proceed in forma pauperis. ECF No. 2. The Court granted Plaintiff’s motion 

to proceed in forma pauperis, but screened the complaint as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1915(e)(2)(B). ECF No. 5. In its order dismissing the complaint, the Court granted Plaintiff 21 

days to amend her complaint. Id. at 3.

 Plaintiff has now filed a First Amended Complaint. ECF No. 6. Plaintiff has also filed 

two motions styled as “Motion[s] to Submit New Evidence.” ECF Nos. 7, 8. Having reviewed 

the First Amended Complaint, the Court still can discern no viable legal theory or ground for 

relief. Because Plaintiff’s complaint the lacks an arguable basis in law or fact, see Jackson v. 

Arizona, 885 F.2d 639, 640-41 (9th Cir. 1999), superseded by statute on other grounds as stated in

Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1130 (9th Cir.2000), the Court will now dismiss the Complaint 

with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). 

The Court will deny Plaintiff’s motions to submit new evidence as moot.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 22, 2015

______________________________________

JON S. TIGAR

United States District Judge

Case 3:15-cv-03151-JST Document 9 Filed 09/22/15 Page 1 of 1