Juan Rodriguez v. State of Montana
This text of Juan Rodriguez v. State of Montana (Juan Rodriguez v. State of Montana) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 13 2020 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JUAN RODRIGUEZ, No. 19-35000
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 6:17-cv-00104-BMM
v. MEMORANDUM* STATE OF MONTANA; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Montana Brian M. Morris, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 6, 2020**
Before: BERZON, N.R. SMITH, and MILLER, Circuit Judges.
Juan Rodriguez appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing
his action under the Indian Child Welfare Act (“ICWA”), 25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.
We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of
discretion a district court’s denial of leave to amend. Curry v. Yelp Inc., 875 F.3d
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 1219, 1224 (9th Cir. 2017). We vacate and remand.
The district court determined that Rodriguez had not sufficiently pled a
violation of his rights under the ICWA, and dismissed without giving leave to
amend. The district court did not determine that amendment would be futile. We
vacate and remand for the district court to allow Rodriguez the opportunity to file
an amended complaint. See Rodriguez v. Steck, 795 F.3d 1187 (9th Cir. 2015)
(order) (plaintiff should be given leave to amend the complaint with directions as
to curing its deficiencies, unless it is absolutely clear from the face of the
complaint that the deficiencies could not be cured by amendment).
Rodriguez’s motion for appointment of counsel (Docket Entry No. 17) is
denied as moot.
VACATED and REMANDED.
2 19-35000
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Juan Rodriguez v. State of Montana, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/juan-rodriguez-v-state-of-montana-ca9-2020.