Gipson

(PC) Armenta v. Gipson

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaSeptember 5, 20252:22-cv-00737California1,143 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RICHARD ARMENTA, No. 2:22-cv-00737-WBS-EFB (PC) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 CONNIE GIPSON, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 18 U.S.C. § 1983. This case proceeds on plaintiff’s first amended complaint alleging Eighth 19 Amendment claims related to his ongoing housing in special needs yards (SNYs) after he has 20 dropped out of an SNY gang. ECF No. 18. Plaintiff has filed two requests for a protective order, 21 in which he asks to seal this case or to be allowed to proceed using a pseudonym. ECF Nos. 127, 22 129. The background of this case and plaintiff’s reasons for his requests have been set forth in 23 the court’s order directing defendants to respond. ECF No. 134. Defendants have responded, and 24 plaintiff has replied. ECF Nos. 135, 136. 25 Defendants oppose plaintiff’s requests. They maintain that plaintiff’s file does not support 26 his claims that he has…

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.