Latesha Howard v. County of San Bernardino

1 JS-6 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 LATESHA HOWARD, Case No. CV 25-01072 DMG (RAO)

12 Plaintiff,

13 v. ORDER OF DISMISSAL 14 COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, et al., 15 Defendants. 16

17 18 Plaintiff Latesha Howard filed a complaint, pro se, on May 2, 2025, and 19 requested to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP). [Doc. ## 1, 3.] On May 20, 2025, the 20 Court screened the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) and found it failed to 21 state a claim upon which relief could be granted and further indicated that abstention 22 under Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971), appeared to be warranted. [Doc. # 6.] 23 The Court dismissed the complaint with leave to amend by June 19, 2025, and 24 deferred ruling on the IFP request. Id. at 4. The Court warned Plaintiff that failure 25 to timely file an amended complaint “will result in the dismissal of this action for 26 failure to prosecute, to state a claim, and/or to comply with a Court Order.” Id. 27 /// 28 /// 1 …