Experian

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ARTICE JACKSON, No. 2:24-cv-01122-TLN-SCR Plaintiff, v. ORDER EXPERIAN, Defendant. 16 Plaintiff is proceeding pro se in this action. This matter was accordingly referred to the undersigned by operation of Local Rule 302(c)(21). Plaintiff filed a request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) and submitted the affidavit required by that statute. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). The motion to proceed IFP will be granted. However, in screening Plaintiff’s complaint, as required by Section 1915(e)(2), the Court concludes that the complaint does not allege facts establishing federal jurisdiction and fails to state a claim. Plaintiff will be granted leave to amend the complaint. I. SCREENING A. Legal Standard The federal IFP statute requires federal courts to dismiss a case if the action is legally “frivolous or malicious,” fails to state a claim upon which relief may be…