Smith v. Spicy Mayo Restaurant

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaFebruary 21, 20251:25-cv-00159California2,288 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 CANDACE SMITH, Case No. 1:25-cv-00159-KES-HBK Plaintiff, SCREENING ORDER v. MARCH 21, 2025 DEADLINE SPICY MAYO RESTAURANT, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff commenced this action on February 7, 2025, by filing a form “Complaint for Civil Case.” (Doc. No. 1, “Complaint”). The Court granted Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. No. 3). Plaintiff’s Complaint is currently before the Court for screening pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). Upon review, the Court finds the Complaint does not set forth a basis for federal subject matter jurisdiction and otherwise fails to state a cognizable claim for relief. The Court will afford Plaintiff an opportunity to file an amended complaint before recommending this case be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. SCREENING REQUIREMENT AND STANDARD Because Plaintiff is proceeding in forma pauperis, the Court may…

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.