Estrada

Estrada v. County of San Diego

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaJanuary 29, 20253:24-cv-01558California4,066 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DOMINICK ESTRADA, Case No.: 24-cv-1558-MMA-LR Booking # 24729020, 12

ORDER: (1) GRANTING MOTION

Plaintiff, 13 TO PROCEED IN FORMA vs. PAUPERIS; AND 14

COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, KELLY

15 [Doc. No. 2] MARTINEZ, Sheriff, CARLSBAD

16 POLICE DEPARTMENT, SEVERAL (2) DISMISSING COMPLAINT

UNKNOWN POLICE OFFICERS,

17 PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE Defendants. OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 8 AND FOR 18

FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM

19 UNDER 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B) AND 1915A(b) 20 21 22 Plaintiff Dominick Estrada (“Plaintiff” or “Estrada”), a detainee proceeding pro se, 23 has filed a civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, along with a motion to 24 proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). See Doc. Nos. 1, 2. In his Complaint, Plaintiff 25 alleges his constitutional rights were violated when he was bitten by law enforcement 26 canine. See generally Doc. No. 1. For the reasons…

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.