Rutherford v. Steadman

Summary

The United States District Court for the Southern District of California dismissed Nicholas Jovon Rutherford’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action after he failed to state a claim and failed to file an amended complaint as required by the court’s prior order. The court also certified that an appeal in forma pauperis would not be taken in good faith and directed the Clerk to enter judgment and close the case.

Holdings

1. A prisoner civil-rights action may be dismissed during statutory screening when the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) and 1915A(b)(1).
2. When a plaintiff fails to respond to a court's order requiring amendment after being warned that noncompliance may result in dismissal, the action may be dismissed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute.
3. The court certified that an appeal in forma pauperis would not be taken in good faith.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the action should be dismissed because the complaint failed to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) and 1915A(b)(1).
2. Whether the action should be dismissed for failure to prosecute after Plaintiff failed to comply with the court's order requiring an amended complaint.
3. Whether the court should certify under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal in forma pauperis would not be taken in good faith.

Disposition

dismissed