From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Brodsky v. Baca

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Jan 27, 2016
Case No. 3:15-cv-00223-RCJ-VPC (D. Nev. Jan. 27, 2016)

Opinion

Case No. 3:15-cv-00223-RCJ-VPC

01-27-2016

JOSHUA D. BRODSKY, Plaintiff, v. WARDEN BACA, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

I. DISCUSSION

On December 3, 2015, the Court issued a Screening Order (ECF No. 8) dismissing Plaintiff's § 1983 claims, with and without leave to amend. On December 23, 2015, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting either a six month extension to amend his complaint or voluntary dismissal of his complaint without prejudice, and that such dismissal not be counted as a "strike" under the Prison Litigation Reform Act ("PLRA"). The Court finds good cause to dismiss Plaintiff's complaint without prejudice and will grant Plaintiff's motion for voluntary dismissal.

II. CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, IT IS ORDERED that the Court's Screening Order (ECF No. 8) is hereby VACATED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion to allow voluntary dismissal (ECF No. 10) is GRANTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the complaint (ECF No. 9) is dismissed in its entirety, without prejudice.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this dismissal does not constitute a "strike" under the PLRA.

DATED: This 27th day of January, 2016.

/s/_________

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Brodsky v. Baca

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Jan 27, 2016
Case No. 3:15-cv-00223-RCJ-VPC (D. Nev. Jan. 27, 2016)
Case details for

Brodsky v. Baca

Case Details

Full title:JOSHUA D. BRODSKY, Plaintiff, v. WARDEN BACA, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

Date published: Jan 27, 2016

Citations

Case No. 3:15-cv-00223-RCJ-VPC (D. Nev. Jan. 27, 2016)