McKinney v. Baca

47 Citing cases

  1. Jackson v. Perez

    1:24-cv-00034-HBK (PC) (E.D. Cal. Oct. 31, 2024)

    Thus, the undersigned recommends that the district court dismiss the FAC without further leave to amend. McKinney v. Baca, 250 Fed.Appx. 781 (9th Cir. 2007) (citing Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1261 (9th Cir.1992)) (noting discretion to deny leave to amend is particularly broad where court has afforded plaintiff one or more opportunities to amend his complaint).

  2. Hughes v. Kelly

    1:24-cv-00660-HBK (PC) (E.D. Cal. Oct. 23, 2024)

    the undersigned recommends that the district court dismiss the FAC without further leave to amend. McKinney v. Baca, 250 Fed.Appx. 781 (9th Cir. 2007) (citing Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1261 (9th Cir.1992)) (noting discretion to deny leave to amend is particularly broad where court has afforded plaintiff one or more opportunities to amend his complaint).

  3. Edwards v. Cnty. of Sacramento

    2:22-cv-1854 SCR P (E.D. Cal. Oct. 15, 2024)

    Dismissal without further leave to amend is appropriate. See McKinney v. Baca, 250 Fed.Appx. 781 (9th Cir. 2007) (dismissal without leave to amend second amended complaint appropriate after district court “notif[ed] [the pro se plaintiff] of the deficiencies in his pleadings, advis[ed] him how to correct them, and afford[ed] him multiple opportunities to amend his complaint” (citing Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1261 (9th Cir. 1992)); Lipton v. Pathogenesis Corp., 284 F.3d 1027, 1039 (9th Cir. 2002) (“Because any amendment would be futile, there was no need to prolong the litigation by permitting further amendment.”).

  4. Lemus v. Visalia Police Dep't

    1:24-cv-00050-JLT-HBK (E.D. Cal. Jun. 25, 2024)

    Thus, the undersigned recommends that the district court dismiss the FAC without further leave to amend. McKinney v. Baca, 250 Fed.Appx. 781 (9th Cir. 2007) (citing Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1261 (9th Cir.1992)) (noting discretion to deny leave to amend is particularly broad where court has afforded plaintiff one or more opportunities to amend his complaint)

  5. Salazar v. Fresno Cnty. Sheriff's Office

    1:24-cv-00167-KES-HBK (PC) (E.D. Cal. Jun. 11, 2024)

    Thus, the undersigned recommends that the district court dismiss the FAC without further leave to amend. McKinney v. Baca, 250 Fed.Appx. 781 (9th Cir. 2007) (citing Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1261 (9th Cir.1992))

  6. Guzman v. Valdez

    1:21-cv-00621-HBK (PC) (E.D. Cal. Jun. 3, 2024)   Cited 1 times

    McKinney v. Baca, 250 Fed.Appx. 781 (9th Cir. 2007) (citing Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1261 (9th Cir.1992)) (noting discretion to deny leave to amend is particularly broad where court has afforded plaintiff one or more opportunities to amend his complaint).

  7. Mays v. Stanton Corr. Facility

    2:23-cv-2339 KJM CSK P (E.D. Cal. Apr. 26, 2024)

    In addition, plaintiff appears unable to comply with the court's orders based on his continued pursuit of a claim under the ADA, despite the prior order dismissing the ADA claim without leave to amend. Thus, it appears futile to grant plaintiff a third opportunity to file an amended complaint, and it is recommended that the district court dismiss the second amended complaint without further leave to amend. McKinney v. Baca, 250 Fed.Appx. 781 (9th Cir. 2007) citing Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1261 (9th Cir. 1992) (noting discretion to deny leave to amend is particularly broad where court has afforded plaintiff one or more opportunities to amend his complaint).

  8. Barra v. Wilson

    1:24-cv-00069-HBK (PC) (E.D. Cal. Apr. 18, 2024)

    Thus, the undersigned recommends that the district court dismiss the SAC without further leave to amend. McKinney v. Baca, 250 Fed.Appx. 781 (9th Cir. 2007) (citing Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1261 (9th Cir.1992)) (noting discretion to deny leave to amend is particularly broad where court has afforded plaintiff one or more opportunities to amend his complaint).

  9. Crane v. Lopez

    1:22-cv-00922-KES-HBK (PC) (E.D. Cal. Mar. 22, 2024)   Cited 2 times

    the undersigned recommends that the district court dismiss the SAC without further leave to amend. McKinney v. Baca, 250 Fed.Appx. 781 (9th Cir. 2007) (citing Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1261 (9th Cir.1992)) (noting discretion to deny leave to amend is particularly broad where court has afforded plaintiff one or more opportunities to amend his complaint)

  10. Nedd v. Landon Bird

    1:23-cv-01630-HBK (PC) (E.D. Cal. Mar. 20, 2024)

    . Thus, the undersigned recommends that the district court dismiss the FAC without further leave to amend. McKinney v. Baca, 250 Fed.Appx. 781 (9th Cir. 2007) (citing Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1261 (9th Cir.1992)) (noting discretion to deny leave to amend is particularly broad where court has afforded plaintiff one or more opportunities to amend his complaint).