From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Dawson v. Reyes

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Dec 10, 2012
No. 2:12-cv-01134-DAD P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 10, 2012)

Opinion

No. 2:12-cv-01134-DAD P

12-10-2012

ISSAC DAWSON, Plaintiff, v. ARTUERO REYES, Defendant.


ORDER

On November 2, 2012, plaintiff filed a letter with the court requesting the status of his case and asking that his case be reopen if it had been closed. On July 5, 2012, the court issued an order dismissing this action due to plaintiff's failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted. (See Dkt. No. 6.) Therefore, the court will not reopen this case. Plaintiff is advised that documents filed by him since the date this case was closed will be disregarded and no orders will issue in response to future filings in this action.

In that order, plaintiff was advised that defendant attorney Reyes was not a "state actor" and therefore was not a proper defendant in a civil rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Dkt. No. 6 at 3-4.)

________

DALE A. DROZD

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Dawson v. Reyes

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Dec 10, 2012
No. 2:12-cv-01134-DAD P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 10, 2012)
Case details for

Dawson v. Reyes

Case Details

Full title:ISSAC DAWSON, Plaintiff, v. ARTUERO REYES, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Dec 10, 2012

Citations

No. 2:12-cv-01134-DAD P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 10, 2012)

Citing Cases

Dawson v. CDCR

Defendants argue that Plaintiff's in forma pauperis status should be revoked because, at the time this action…