Scott
Scott v. Hill
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaMay 27, 20253:24-cv-02400California5,294 words
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ROBERT SCOTT, Case No.: 3:24-cv-2400-WQH-MSB
CDCR #AK5483,
ORDER: (1) GRANTING MOTION
Plaintiff, TO PROCEED IN FORMA vs. PAUPERIS [ECF No. 2];
(2) DISMISSING COMPLAINT FOR
JAMES HILL, JOHN/JANE DOE, GAIL FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM
MESSLER, DAVID GULDSETH, PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C.
DAVID CLAYTON, JAMES E. BATES, §§ 1915(e)(2)(B) AND 1915A(b)
MARK JACOBSON, AMIR
MOHAMED, PEYMAN SHAKIBA,
Defendants. 20 I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Robert Scott (“Plaintiff” or “Scott”), a state inmate proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, along with a motion to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). See ECF Nos. 1, 2. In his Complaint, Scott alleges Defendants violated his Eighth Amendment right to adequate medical care by delaying total knee replacement surgery for both knees, subsequently…