govinfo:USCOURTS-cand-4_24-cv-05231-2

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 
Northern District of California 
 
 
 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 
 
MARCEL DOUGLAS FORD, 
Plaintiff, 
v. 
 
ALANIS, et al., 
Defendants. 
 

 
 
ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT 
PREJUDICE PURSUANT TO FED. R. 
CIV. P. 41 
 
 
 
Plaintiff, an inmate housed at California Correctional Institution in Tehachapi, California, 
filed this pro se action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that Pelican Bay State Prison 
(“PBSP”) officers Alanis, Ford, Goodwin, and Hendrix were aware that he was housed in a cell 
that lacked heat; had shards of broken glass on the floor; had a leaking ceiling; and had faucets 
that produced dirty ashy water, but failed to address these unconstitutional conditions of 
confinement, in violation of the Eighth Amendment. ECF Nos. 12, 13. Defendants filed a 
summary judgment motion, arguing that Plaintiff had failed to exhaust his administrative remedies 
for this claim. ECF No. 21. Plaintiff filed a response which he titled: “Plaintiff is not sure of the 
failure to exhaust or not but will respectfully close the case due to the unfairness of the court 
system itself.” ECF No. 27. In the response, Plaintiff reiterated that he was uncertain as to 
whether he had exhausted his administrative remedies: “I, Plaintiff Marcel Douglas Ford, cannot 
say with honesty, if I did or did not exhaust administrative remedies . . . Plaintiff may or may not 
have exhausted and Plaintiff will except (sic) all responsibility not meeting this standard . . .” 
ECF No. 27 at 2, 4. Plaintiff stated that he wished to close the case. ECF No. 27 at 1, 2, 5. 
Defendants do not oppose Plaintiff’s request to dismiss this case. ECF No. 28. 
Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2) provides that after a summary judgment motion has been filed, an 

2 
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 
Northern District of California 
action may be dismissed at the plaintiff’s request only by court order. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2). 
Good cause being shown, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s request to dismiss this action and 
DISMISSES this action without prejudice. 
IT IS SO ORDERED. 
Dated: June 12, 2026 
______________________________________ 
JON S. TIGAR 
United States District Judge 

Passage view · GavelSight