Macomber
(PS) Nible v. Macomber
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 WILLIAM LYLE NIBLE, Case No. 2:24-cv-01259-DJC-CSK Plaintiff, v. ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’
REQUEST TO SCREEN FIRST AMENDED
JEFF MACOMBER, et al., COMPLAINT AND STAY PROCEEDINGS Defendants. (ECF No. 21, 26) 17 Plaintiff William Lyle Nible is proceeding in this action pro se.1 Pending before the Court is Defendants J. Macomber, T. Dorsey, S. Reyes, C. Lugar, H. E. Moseley, R. St. Louis-Franklin, R. Broomfield’s (“Defendants”) motion to stay proceedings pending Defendants’ request for screening of Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(c). (ECF Nos. 21, 26.) For the reasons stated below, the Court DENIES Defendants’ request for screening Plaintiff’s FAC (ECF No. 21) and DENIES Defendants’ motion to stay proceedings (ECF No. 26).
This matter proceeds before the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, Fed. R. Civ. P. 72,…