Hartley
Hartley v. Bright
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 ROGER ANDREW HARTLEY, Case No. 23-cv-00767-PCP
Plaintiff,
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
v.
D. BRIGHT, et al., Defendants.
12 On or after February 1, 2023, Roger A. Hartley, an inmate at the California Institution for Men in Chino, California, filed this pro se civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See Dkt. No. 1 at 3 (signing and dating the Complaint on that date); see also Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 (1988) (announcing the mailbox rule for prisoners). The Court dismissed the complaint with leave to amend. See Dkt. No. 15. Mr. Harley has filed an Amended Complaint, Dkt. No. 16, which is before the Court for review under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. The Amended Complaint and the exhibits thereto show that Mr. Hartley’s claim is time- barred. This lawsuit therefore is DISMISSED with prejudice. I. Legal Standard Federal courts must screen any case in which a prisoner seeks redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. See 28…