Lopez

Lopez v. Peterson

Good Law
329 F. App'x 95
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 26, 2009No. 07-15899California807 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Andrew Rick Lopez, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district *97 court’s interlocutory orders dismissing claims against certain defendants in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 because the parties voluntarily dismissed the sole remaining claim in this action with prejudice. See Amadeo v. Principal Mut. Life Ins. Co., 290 F.3d 1152, 1158-61 (9th Cir.2002). We review de novo a dismissal for failure to state a claim, Berg v. Popham, 412 F.3d 1122, 1125 (9th Cir.2005), and a dismissal for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108, 1117 (9th Cir.2003). We review for abuse of discretion a ruling pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16, Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Glickman, 450 F.2d 416, 419 (9th Cir.1971) (per curiam), and the denial of leave to amend, Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1130 (9th Cir.2000) (en banc). We affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand.

In its June 24, 2005, 2005 WL 1553999 , order, the district court properly dismissed with prejudice Lopez’s claims against defendants Ballard, Hooper, Jennings, Munoz, and Platt based on an alleged nine-month…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.