(PS) Rigor v. Sacramento Regional Transit

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SORAYA MARIA RIGOR, No. 2:25-cv-00243-TLN-SCR Plaintiff, v. ORDER SACRAMENTO REGIONAL TRANSIT, et al., 15 Defendants.

17 Plaintiff is proceeding pro se in this action, and accordingly the matter was referred to the 18 undersigned pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21). Plaintiff has filed a request for leave to proceed 19 in forma pauperis (“IFP”) and has submitted the affidavit required by that statute. See 28 U.S.C. 20 § 1915(a)(1)1. The motion to proceed IFP will therefore be granted. However, for the reasons 21 provided below, the Court finds Plaintiff’s complaint is legally deficient and will grant Plaintiff 22 leave to file an amended complaint.

I. SCREENING

24 A. Legal Standard 25 The federal IFP statute requires federal courts to dismiss a case if the action is legally 26 27 Plaintiff submitted the request on a state court form, but the Court will accept it given that it includes a statement of assets, income, and expenses and is signed under penalty of…