Smith v. Sonoma County, California
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 DAVID MICHAEL SMITH, Case No. 24-cv-07204-DMR
Plaintiff,
ORDER GRANTING IFP
v. APPLICATION AND SCREENING
COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C.
SONOMA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, et al., § 1915(E) Defendants.
Self-represented Plaintiff David Michael Smith filed a complaint and an application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). [Docket Nos. 1 (Compl.), 2 (IFP).] Having considered Plaintiff’s papers, the court grants the IFP application and finds that the complaint fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). Plaintiff must file 15 a first amended complaint that addresses the deficiencies identified in this screening order by 16 December 3, 2024.
I. LEGAL STANDARD
18 A court may allow a plaintiff to prosecute an action in federal court without prepayment of 19 fees or security if the plaintiff submits an affidavit showing that he or she is unable to pay such 20 fees or provide such security. See 28 U.S.C. §…