Clinton

Clinton v. Pollard

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaMay 7, 20243:23-cv-00119California6,341 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

BACKGROUND

21 On January 20, 2023, Markeith Clinton (“Plaintiff” of “Clinton”), a state inmate 22 proceeding pro se, filed a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, along with an 23 application to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). ECF Nos. 1, 2. The Court granted 24

26 1 Plaintiff alternates between the spelling “Nhan” and “Nahn” in his amended complaint. For the sake of consistency, the Court will use the spelling contained in the caption of the amended 28 Plaintiff’s IFP motion and dismissed his complaint without prejudice. ECF No. 5. The Court informed Plaintiff of the pleading deficiencies in his complaint and granted him leave to amend. See id. The Court further notified Clinton that if he failed to timely amend, final judgment of dismissal would be entered based on his failure to state a claim and failure to prosecute in compliance with the Court’s order requiring amendment. Id. at 16 (citing Lira v. Herrera, 427 F.3d 1164, 1169 (9th Cir. 2005) (“If a plaintiff does not take advantage of the opportunity to fix his complaint, a district court may convert the dismissal of the complaint into dismissal of the entire action.”)). On July…

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.