(PS) Holt v. Sacramento County Sheriff Dept.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SANDY HOLT, Case No. 2:24-cv-03256-DJC-CSK 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER GRANTING IFP REQUEST AND

GRANTING LEAVE TO AMEND

14 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT, et al., (ECF Nos. 1, 2) 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Sandy Holt is representing herself in this action and seeks leave to 18 proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915.1 (ECF No. 2.) Plaintiff’s 19 application in support of the IFP request makes the required financial showing. 20 Accordingly, the Court grants Plaintiff’s IFP request. 21 I. SCREENING REQUIREMENT 22 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), the court must screen every in forma pauperis 23 proceeding, and must order dismissal of the case if it is “frivolous or malicious,” “fails to 24 state a claim on which relief may be granted,” or “seeks monetary relief against a 25 defendant who is immune from such relief.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B); Lopez v. Smith, 26 203 F.3d 1122, 1126-27 (2000) (en banc). A claim is legally…