Tremane Darnell Carthen v. P. Scott;

21-15063Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit25.08.2021

Gesamter Gesetzestext

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
TREMANE DARNELL CARTHEN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
P. SCOTT; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 21-15063
D.C. No. 1:19-cv-00227-DAD-EPG
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Dale A. Drozd, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted August 17, 2021**
Before: SILVERMAN, CHRISTEN, and LEE, Circuit Judges.
Federal prisoner Tremane Darnell Carthen appeals pro se from the district
court’s judgment dismissing his action brought under Bivens v. Six Unknown
Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), alleging
violations of his constitutional rights. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
* 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).
FILED
AUG 25 2021
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 21-15063
§ 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Hamilton v.
Brown, 630 F.3d 889, 892 (9th Cir. 2011). We vacate and remand.
On appeal, Carthen submitted objections to the magistrate judge’s finding
and recommendations and a proposed amended complaint. Carthen claims that
these documents were not filed in the district court due to his prison’s failure to
mail the documents. Because Carthen’s proposed amended complaint includes
allegations that may cure the deficiencies noted by the findings and
recommendations, we vacate the judgment and remand for the district court to
consider whether Carthen should be allowed to file an amended complaint.
On remand, the district court should address whether a Bivens remedy exists
for the various claims Carthen asserts. See Ziglar v. Abbasi, 137 S. Ct. 1843
(2017).
Carthen’s motion to file an amended complaint with this court (Docket Entry
No. 5) and motion for appointment of counsel (Docket Entry Nos. 8 and 9) are
denied.
VACATED and REMANDED.

-- 2 of 2 --

Setzen Sie Ihre Recherche in ChatGPT oder Claude fort

Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.