Daniel Raymond Gallimore v. Antony J. Blinken

Good Law
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaAugust 24, 20238:23-cv-01392California1,636 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10 DANIEL-RAYMOND GALLIMORE, ) Case No. SACV 23-1392-JFW (JPR) ) Plaintiff, ) ) ORDER SUMMARILY DISMISSING v. ) COMPLAINT WITH PREJUDICE ) ANTONY J. BLINKEN et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ) 16 On August 2, 2023, Plaintiff filed this pro se civil-rights Complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983; he also purports to raise various Federal Tort Claims Act claims. Plaintiff paid the $402 filing fee. The named defendants are Antony J. Blinken, Janet Yellen, and the City of Huntington Beach. Because the Complaint 22 23 Plaintiff does not provide a complete return address — stating that he is “zip code Exempt” (see, e.g., Compl., ECF No. 1 at 1) — and mail the Court has sent him in another of his recent cases has been returned as undeliverable. Plaintiff’s Complaint is therefore subject to dismissal under Local Rule 41-6 as well as for the reasons stated herein. Plaintiff lists numerous other persons and entities — including the undersigned and the Magistrate…

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.