From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Nicholaw v. Bd. of Supervisors

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Nov 22, 2011
No. C-11-4272 JCS (N.D. Cal. Nov. 22, 2011)

Opinion

No. C-11-4272 JCS

11-22-2011

ANDY NICHOLAW, Plaintiff, v. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, Defendants.


ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT

Plaintiff Andy Nicholaw has filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis. He has consented to the jurisdiction of a United States magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). On October 14, 2011, the Court granted Plaintiff's application, finding him indigent. However, the Complaint was dismissed with leave to amend for failure to state a claim.

On October 19, 2011, Plaintiff timely filed a First Amended Complaint. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), the Court is required to dismiss an in forma pauperis complaint that fails to state a claim. Marks v. Solcum, 98 F.3d 494, 495 (9th Cir. 1996). As with the initial Complaint, the Court is unable to discern any legally cognizable claim in Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint. Despite the Court's admonishment to provide specific facts that support the claims, the First Amended Complaint contains bare recitations of legal standards, with no facts in support.

Therefore, the Court DISMISSES Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint. The Clerk shall close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

JOSEPH C. SPERO

United States Magistrate Judge


Summaries of

Nicholaw v. Bd. of Supervisors

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Nov 22, 2011
No. C-11-4272 JCS (N.D. Cal. Nov. 22, 2011)
Case details for

Nicholaw v. Bd. of Supervisors

Case Details

Full title:ANDY NICHOLAW, Plaintiff, v. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Nov 22, 2011

Citations

No. C-11-4272 JCS (N.D. Cal. Nov. 22, 2011)