Mohyuddin

(PC) Dunham v. Mohyuddin

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJanuary 29, 20252:23-cv-02757California3,752 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RANDALL DUNHAM, No. 2:23-CV-2757-DMC-P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 ALIASGHAR MOHYUDDIN, et al., and 15 Defendants. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 16 17 Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 18 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the Court is Defendants’ motion for partial dismissal. See ECF 19 No. 22. Plaintiff has filed an opposition. See ECF No. 23. Defendants have filed a reply. See ECF 20 No. 24. 21 In considering a motion to dismiss, the Court must accept all allegations of 22 material fact in the complaint as true. See Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 93-94 (2007). The 23 Court must also construe the alleged facts in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. See Scheuer 24 v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 236 (1974); see also Hosp. Bldg. Co. v. Rex Hosp. Trustees, 425 U.S. 25 738, 740 (1976); Barnett v. Centoni, 31 F.3d 813, 816 (9th Cir. 1994) (per curiam). All 26 ambiguities or doubts…

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.