Lockett
- William Orrick
- 3:24-cv-07493
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
Lockett v. Delgado: Judge Orrick dismissed Lockett’s civil-rights action for failing to exhaust remedies, while allowing an amended complaint.
Trivon Nuvell Lockett, whose action against Y. Delgado was dismissed with leave to amend.
What happened
In Trivon Nuvell Lockett v. Y. Delgado, Lockett brought a civil-rights action under a federal law allowing suits against state officials. He said his appeal was still being reviewed at the third level when he sued.
The court dismissed the complaint because available administrative remedies had not been exhausted before the action was filed. The court allowed Lockett to file an amended complaint by May 1, 2025, and explained that a later amended complaint could address the exhaustion problem.
Judge William Orrick required the amended complaint to use the court’s form, include all claims and defendants, and identify whether Lockett had exhausted his remedies. The order warned that failing to file a proper amended complaint by the deadline may result in dismissal for failure to prosecute.
The detailed version
- Lockett · No. 3:24-cv-07493
- William Orrick
- Mar. 26, 2025
Background
Trivon Nuvell Lockett filed an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Y. Delgado. The complaint stated that Lockett’s appeal was being reviewed at the third level of the administrative review process.
Court’s Analysis
The court held that the action had to be dismissed because the complaint showed that Lockett had not exhausted available administrative remedies before filing suit. The court relied on decisions stating that a prisoner must complete available administrative remedies before bringing the action. It also explained that an exhaustion problem can be cured through a later amended complaint if the plaintiff has fully exhausted the remedies by the time the amended complaint is filed.
Ruling and Instructions
Judge William Orrick dismissed the complaint with leave to file an amended complaint on or before May 1, 2025. The amended complaint must make clear whether Lockett has exhausted his administrative remedies. It must use the caption and civil case number in the order, state “FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT” on the first page, and appear on the court’s form. Because an amended complaint replaces earlier complaints, Lockett must include every claim and defendant he wishes to pursue and may not incorporate the earlier complaint by reference. The order states that failure to file a proper amended complaint by May 1, 2025, may result in dismissal of the action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.