Hackett-Addison v. Harrington

District Court, N.D. California·Decided October 9, 2025·No. 3:25-cv-03513·Unknown

Opinion

AMILLIYON R. HACKETT-ADDISON, Case No. 25-cv-03513-JSC Plaintiff, ORDER OF DISMISSAL v. HARRINGTON, et al., Defendants. On August 4, 2025, Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim screened Plaintiff’s civil rights complaint and dismissed for failure to present a cognizable claim. (ECF No. 8.) Plaintiff was granted 28 days to file an amended complaint, and warned that if he did not do so the case would be dismissed. The case was reassigned to the undersigned District Judge.1 Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint, requested an extension of time, or shown cause why not. This case is accordingly DISMISSED with prejudice. See WMX Technologies v. Miller, 104 F.3d 1133, 1136 (9th Cir. 1997) (when complaint has been dismissed with leave to amend and plaintiff does not amend, further district court determination is necessary). The Clerk shall enter judgment and close the file. Dated: October 9, 2025 JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY United States District Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Hackett-Addison v. Harrington, (N.D. Cal. 2025).

Hackett-Addison v. Harrington (Hackett-Addison v. Harrington) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.