Uldall

(PC) Lucero v. Uldall

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMay 16, 20252:24-cv-02890California844 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ALBERT BENJAMIN LUCERO, JR.., No. 2:24-cv-2890-CKD P Plaintiff, v. ORDER AND ERIC ULDALL, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Defendant. 16 Plaintiff Albert Lucero, Jr., a state prisoner, proceeds without counsel under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and seeks to proceed in forma pauperis. This matter is referred to the undersigned by Local Rule 302. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Plaintiff’s complaint is before the court for screening and should be dismissed because plaintiff seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from suit. I. In Forma Pauperis Plaintiff’s declaration in support of the motion to proceed in forma pauperis makes the showing required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). The motion is granted. By separate order, plaintiff will be assessed an initial partial filing fee in accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). The order will direct the appropriate agency to collect the initial partial filing fee…

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.