Galaz

(PC) Casey v. Galaz

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaFebruary 13, 20231:20-cv-00559California1,447 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

BACKGROUND

23 On January 6, 2023, the Court issued a Screening Order finding the complaint failed to 24 state any cognizable claims. (Doc. No. 11). The Court afforded Plaintiff the opportunity to file a 25 first amended complaint curing the deficiencies in his pleading; file a notice that he intends to 26 stand on his initial complaint subject to the undersigned recommending the district court dismiss 27 this action for reasons stated in the Screening Order; or file a notice of voluntary dismissal. (Id. Plaintiff that if he “fails to timely respond to this Court Order, i.e., fails to perform any of the three options, the undersigned will recommend that the district court dismiss this case as a sanction for Plaintiff’s failure to comply with a court order and for failing to prosecute this action after its determination that the complaint failed to state a claim, which will count as strike under the PLRA.” (Id. at 6-7). The twenty-one-day deadline has lapsed, and Plaintiff has not elected any of the three options or otherwise moved for an extension of time. (See generally docket). APPLICABLE LAW AND ANALYSIS A. Legal…

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.