From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Driver v. Doe

United States District Court, Central District of California
Jun 14, 2021
CV 19-3791-GW (AGR) (C.D. Cal. Jun. 14, 2021)

Opinion

CV 19-3791-GW (AGR)

06-14-2021

BILLY DRIVER JR., Plaintiff, v. JOHN DOE, et al., Defendants.


ORDER OF DISMISSAL

GEORGE H. WU UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE.

On May 2, 2019, Plaintiff, a state prisoner who is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

On January 24, 2020, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) against (1) Detective Rubin, (2) “Registered Nurse” of the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, (3) Warden C. Pfeiffer, (4) Dr. Jones L.C.S.W., and (5) Dr. Grewal. (Dkt. No. 41.) The body of the complaint adds the following categories of defendants: (6) Lieutenants “Skitter, ” Redding, Todd, Miller, Diaz, Martinez, and Ochoa; (7) Medical Technical Assistant Shepard; (8) Correctional Officers Aguilar, Torrez, Forsyth, Orr, Murphy, Emerson, Fry, Davis, Nichols, Sevilla, Anglni, and Estrada; and (9) Sergeants Chanelo, Ricki Savage, Mora, Salcedo, Spark(s), Miller, Ray, and Varela. (FAC at 6.)

On April 22, 2021, the Court issued an order dismissing Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint With Leave to Amend within 30 days after entry of the order. The Court warned Plaintiff that failure to file a timely Second Amended Complaint will result in dismissal of this action.

Plaintiff did not file a Second Amended Complaint or request an extension of time to do so.

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Driver v. Doe

United States District Court, Central District of California
Jun 14, 2021
CV 19-3791-GW (AGR) (C.D. Cal. Jun. 14, 2021)
Case details for

Driver v. Doe

Case Details

Full title:BILLY DRIVER JR., Plaintiff, v. JOHN DOE, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Central District of California

Date published: Jun 14, 2021

Citations

CV 19-3791-GW (AGR) (C.D. Cal. Jun. 14, 2021)