(PC)Harris

(PC)Harris v. Largoza

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMarch 17, 20202:19-cv-00788California442 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MONTANA R. HARRIS, No. 2:19-cv-0788-EFB P Plaintiff, v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

N. LARGOZA, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff, a state prisoner, proceeds without counsel in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 302 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On February 12, 2020, the court screened plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. ECF No. 5. The court dismissed the complaint, explained the deficiencies therein, and granted plaintiff thirty days in which to file an amended complaint to cure the deficiencies. Id. The screening order warned plaintiff that failure to comply would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. The time for acting has now passed and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint.1 26 1 Although it appears from the file that plaintiff’s copy of the order was returned, plaintiff was…

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.