Green v. Whetzel et al, No. 6:2016cv00575 - Document 11 (D. Or. 2016)

Court Description: Opinion and Order: Plaintiff has failed to comply with this Court's initial Order to Show Cause 4 by failing to cure or even address any of the deficiencies in his various claims, this action is dismissed with prejudice. Signed on 6/28/2016 by Judge Michael J. McShane. (cp)

Download PDF
Green v. Whetzel et al Doc. 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON BLISS HEBERLEIN GREEN, Plaintiff, Civ. No. 6:16-cv-00575-MC V. OPINION AND ORDER DOUGLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT et al., Defendants. MCSHANE, Judge: Plaintiff, an eighty-five year old California resident filing prose, filed his initial complaint against various Defendants including the Douglas County Sheriffs Department and the Oregon Department of Motor Vehicles' ("DMV") Roseburg branch on April 4, 2016. Compl. 1, ECF No. 1. On April 11, 2016, this Court issued an Order to Show Cause and accompanying Opinion dismissing plaintiffs complaint for failure to state a claim. Opinion and Order, ECF No. 4. In consideration of plaintiffs prose status, this Court granted plaintiff until May 11, 2016, to file an amended complaint curing the deficiencies identified in the Court's Opinion. Id. at 3. The deficiencies identified by this Court, in brief, were: (1) failure to identify any duty to read Miranda warnings as part of a routine traffic stop during which Plaintiff walked away from the officer involved; (2) failure to state a constitutional claim to relief plausible on its face regarding a comment from the officer about potentially suspending Plaintiffs license; and (3) failure to identify any duty of an officer to warn Plaintiff that his tires were low before allowing him drive away. See ECF No. 4 at 2-4. 1 - OPINION AND ORDER Dockets.Justia.com Plaintiff thereafter voluntarily withdrew his complaint on April 26, 2016. ECF No. 6. This court accepted that withdrawal that same day and allowed Plaintiffs filing fee to be refunded by the Clerk of Court. ECF No. 7. Following an interceding event loosely described by Plaintiff, which this Court reads to have been some manner of phone conversation, Plaintiff moved to withdraw his withdrawal, ECF No. 8, which this Court allowed. ECF No. 9. That allowance reinitiated the Court's previous Order to Show Cause. ECF No. 9. On June 23, 2016, Plaintiff timely filed his amended complaint. In that document, Plaintiff does not address any of the deficiencies identified above. He instead comments on various contentions he has with the Oregon DMV and provides even less specific claims against the Sheriffs deputy defendant. Because Plaintiff has failed to comply with this Court's initial Order to Show Cause, ECF No. 4, by failing to cure or even address any of the deficiencies in his various claims, this action is DISMISSED with prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this 'Z<t day of June, 2016. \ LL-- Michael J. McShane United States District Judge 2 - OPINION AND ORDER

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.