Cardenas v. Becerra

Background

On March 11, 2021, the court dismissed Cardenas’s complaint but allowed him to amend it. The court said the complaint was so unclear that it was nearly impossible to determine who Cardenas was suing and what relief he sought. The court ordered him to file a simple and concise amended complaint satisfying Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2), which requires a short and plain statement of the claim. The court warned that failing to file a proper complaint within 28 days would result in dismissal of the action.

More than 28 days passed. Cardenas did not file an amended complaint and did not request an extension of time. A letter he had filed before the March 11 order was processed suggested that his claims involved events or omissions at the California Medical Facility in Vacaville, Solano County. The court stated that this location lies within the venue of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California.

Ruling

The court dismissed the action without prejudice to bringing it in the Eastern District of California. It also directed the clerk to close the file and terminate all pending motions as moot. The opinion did not decide the underlying merits of Cardenas’s claims.

Effect

The dismissal was without prejudice, meaning the order did not bar Cardenas from bringing the matter in the Eastern District of California. The opinion does not provide further details about the claims or identify the additional defendants listed as “et al.”