govinfo:USCOURTS-casd-3_25-cv-03416-1

1 
3:25-cv-3416-JES-LR 
1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 
 
WAYNE JOSEPH RICHARDSON, 
CDCR #D-11329, 
Plaintiff, 
vs. 
CALIFORNIA CORRECTIONAL 
HEALTH CARE SERVICES, 
DR. E. ESTOCK and DR. QUANG VO, 
Defendants. 

 
ORDER DISMISSING ACTION FOR 
FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM 
AND FAILURE TO PROSECUTE 
 
 
 On November 24, 2025, Plaintiff Wayne Joseph Richardson, a state inmate 
proceeding pro se, filed a civil rights Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, along with 
a motion to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). ECF Nos. 1-2. Plaintiff alleged medical 
malpractice for being incorrectly diagnosed with and treated for Lupu s for more than 
thirteen years. ECF No. 1 at 2. 
 On March 17, 2026, the Court granted Plaintiff leave to proceed IFP and dismissed 
the Complaint without prejudice for failure to state a claim. ECF No. 3 at 4-5, citing Estelle 
v. Gamble , 429 U.S. 97, 106 (1976) (“Medical malpractice does not become a 
constitutional violation merely because the victim is a prisoner.”) and Farmer v. Brennan, 
Case 3:25-cv-03416-JES-LR Document 4 Filed 06/16/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
1 of 2
 
2 
3:25-cv-3416-JES-LR 
1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
511 U.S. 825, 835 (1994) (holding that “[D]eliberate indifference [necessary to state an 42 
U.S.C. § 1983 denial of medical care claim] describes a state of mind more blameworthy 
than negligence” and “more than ordinary lack of due care for the prisoner’s interests or 
safety.”) 
Plaintiff was instructed on the requirements for stating a § 1983 claim and granted 
leave to amend on or before May 1, 2026. Id. at 5-7. Plaintiff was further instructed that 
failure to amend w ould result in dismissal of this action for failure to state a claim and 
failure to prosecute. Id. at 7-8, citing Lira v. Herrera, 427 F.3d 1164, 1169 (9th Cir. 2005) 
(“If a plaintiff does not take advantage of the opportunity to fix his complaint, a district 
court may convert the dismissal of the complaint into dismissal of the entire action.”) 
As of the date of this Order Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint, nor has he 
contacted the Court. Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES this action without prejudice for 
failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 
§§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) & 1915A(b)(1), and for failure to prosecute. The Clerk of Court shall 
enter final judgment accordingly and close the file. 
 IT IS SO ORDERED. 
Dated: June 16, 2026 
 
 
 
Case 3:25-cv-03416-JES-LR Document 4 Filed 06/16/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
2 of 2

Passage view · GavelSight