Valero
(PS) Rogers v. Valero
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 NICOLE JEAN ROGERS, No. 2:25-cv-00488-DC-CKD (PS) Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER GRANTING IFP REQUEST 14 VALERO, et. al., AND DISMISSING WITH LEAVE TO
AMEND
Defendants.
17 18 Plaintiff Nicole Jean Rogers proceeds pro se in this action which was referred to the 19 undersigned by Local Rule 302(c)(21) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). Plaintiff has filed an 20 application in support of her request to proceed in forma pauperis which makes the showing 21 required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). (ECF No. 2.) The request will be granted.
I. SCREENING REQUIREMENT
23 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), the court must screen every in forma pauperis 24 proceeding, and must order dismissal of the case if it is “frivolous or malicious,” “fails to state a 25 claim on which relief may be granted,” or “seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is 26 immune from such relief.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B); Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1126-27 27 (2000). In performing this screening, the court liberally…