Robert Bishop v. Kelly Harrington

MEMORANDUM

California state prisoner Robert Bishop appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging retaliation, due process, and deliberate indifference claims against numerous defendants at two different prisons. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review for an abuse of discretion a district court’s decision regarding joinder, but review de novo the legal conclusions underlying that decision. Coleman v. Quaker Oats Co., 232 F.3d 1271, 1296 (9th Cir.2000); Desert Empire Bank v. Ins. Co. of N. Am., 623 F.2d 1371, 1375 (9th Cir.1980). We vacate and remand.

Although the district court properly concluded that Bishop’s action did not meet the requirements of Fed.R.Civ.P. 20(a)(2), the district court abused its discretion in dismissing Bishop’s action because misjoin-der of parties is not a proper ground for dismissing an action. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 21 (“Misjoinder of parties is not a ground for dismissing an action. On motion or on its own, the court may at any time, on just terms, add or drop a party. The court may also sever any claim against a party.”). Accordingly, we vacate and remand to the district court for further…