Sidney Marts v. Officer Burfield Officer Hedlund

961 F.2d 216 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Sidney MARTS, Plaintiffs-Appellant, v. Officer BURFIELD; Officer Hedlund, Defendants-Appellees. No. 91-15282. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Nov. 26, 1991. * Decided April 28, 1992. Before HUG, POOLE and CANBY, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Sidney Marts, a Nevada state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his complaint for failure to state a claim pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). 1 Marts contends that his complaint properly stated a claim and that the district court erred in dismissing his complaint before two of the defendants had been served. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and vacate and remand. 3 * Failure to State a Claim 4 We review de novo the district court's dismissal for failure to state a claim pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6). Tanner v. Heise, 879 F.2d 572, 576 (9th Cir.1989). All allegations of material fact are taken as true and…