Banuelos

Griggs v. Banuelos

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMay 28, 20251:25-cv-00613California2,659 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 MICHAEL GRIGGS Case No. 1:25-cv-00613-SKO

Plaintiff, FIRST SCREENING ORDER v. ORDER FOR PLAINTIFF TO: (1) FILE A FIRST AMENDED

COMPLAINT; OR

JOHN BANUELOS,

(2) NOTIFY THE COURT THAT HE Defendant. WISHES TO STAND ON HIS

COMPLAINT

15 (Doc. 1)

THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE

18 19 On May 23, 2025, Plaintiff Michael Griggs (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se, filed an action. (Doc. 1.) On that same date, Plaintiff also filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis, which was granted on May 27, 2025. (Docs. 2 & 3.) Plaintiff’s complaint is now before the Court for screening. Upon review, the Court concludes that the complaint fails to state any cognizable claims. Plaintiff has the following options as to how to proceed. Plaintiff may file an amended complaint, which the Court will screen in due course. Alternatively, Plaintiff may file a statement with the Court stating…

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.