Parks

(PC) Martinez v. Parks

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaDecember 18, 20241:21-cv-01496California5,557 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 RONALD F. MARTINEZ, Case No.: 1:21-cv-001496-KES-CDB Plaintiff, SECOND SCREENING ORDER

v.

A. PARKS, Defendant. 16 Plaintiff Ronald F. Martinez is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. section 1983. I. INTRODUCTION The Court issued its first screening order on August 2, 2023. (Doc. 44.) It found Plaintiff’s operative complaint stated cognizable First Amendment retaliation claims against Defendants Parks and M. Lirones based upon his litigation efforts but failed to state cognizable retaliation claims based upon Plaintiff’s legal assistance to other inmates. (Id. at 12-13.) Plaintiff was given leave to file a fourth amended complaint, or to file written notice that he did not want to amend and wished to stand on his complaint as screened, or to file a notice of voluntary dismissal. (Id. at 13-14.) On August 24, 2024, Plaintiff filed a fourth amended complaint. (Doc. 47.) 1…

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.