John R. Gomez, Plaintiff-appellant, v. J. Gomez; K.w. Prunty, Chief Deputy Warden, Defendants-appellees, 92 F.3d 1192 (9th Cir. 1996)

 Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 92 F.3d 1192 (9th Cir. 1996) Submitted July 29, 1996. *Decided Aug. 5, 1996

Before: HUG, Chief Judge, SCHROEDER and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM** 

John R. Gomez, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his action for failure to state a claim. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a district court's Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b) (6) dismissal for failure to state a claim, see Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep't, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1990), and affirm.

Gomez's sole contention on appeal is that the district court erred because it did not instruct him to oppose defendants' motion to dismiss. This contention lacks merit. The district court has no obligation to instruct plaintiffs, even prisoners appearing pro se, to oppose motions to dismiss. Cf. Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 116 S. Ct. 119 (1995). Accordingly, we affirm the district court's dismissal.

AFFIRMED.1 

 *

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4

 **

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3

 1

Because of our disposition of this appeal, we do not consider the applicability, if any, of the Prison Litigation Reform Act, Pub. L. No. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321 (1996), to this appeal

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.