Gaines

Gaines v. State of California

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaSeptember 5, 20243:24-cv-01280California3,983 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

I. INTRODUCTION

15 On March 15, 2024, the Court granted Plaintiff Ronisha Sharde Gaines’s application to 16 proceed in forma pauperis and screened the complaint, finding it deficient under 28 U.S.C. 17 § 1915(e). ECF No. 5. Plaintiff has now filed a First Amended Complaint. ECF No. 11. A 18 second amended complaint has also been filed. Sec. Amended Compl., ECF 14. Since the first 19 amended complaint has already been replaced, the Court will address the second amended 20 complaint. For the reasons stated below, the Court finds the second amended complaint is still 21 deficient. No later than October 3, 2024, Plaintiff must file a third amended complaint curing the 22 deficiencies identified in this screening order. If Plaintiff fails to cure these deficiencies, the case 23 will be reassigned to a district judge with a recommendation for dismissal.

II. BACKGROUND

25 Plaintiff was instructed in the first screening order to remedy the lack of federal subject 26 matter jurisdiction, the failure to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8, the 27 immunity of some defendants, and the frivolousness of many of the allegations in the complaint. The Court…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.