Andrew

(PC) Ricalls v. Andrew

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaNovember 29, 20232:23-cv-00771California445 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JAMES LEONDARD RICALLS, No. 2:23-cv-00771-EFB (PC) Plaintiff, v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

P. ANDREW, Defendant. 16 Plaintiff, a state prisoner, proceeds without counsel in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On June 12, 2023, the court screened plaintiff’s amended complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and dismissed it with leave to amend. ECF No. 4. The court 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. Rather than file the amended complaint, plaintiff filed a motion for leave to amend. The court, on September 1, 2023, informed plaintiff he had already been granted leave to amend and directed plaintiff to file an amended complaint within 30 days. ECF No. 8. The time for doing so has…

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.