Cooper Fields v. Monsanto Company

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaSeptember 23, 20252:25-cv-02042California1,091 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 COOPER FIELDS, No. 2:25–cv–02042-DAD–CKD PS Plaintiffs, ORDER

v.

MONSANTO COMPANY, Defendant. 16 Plaintiff, who is proceeding without counsel in this action, requests leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). (ECF No. 2.) See 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (authorizing the commencement of an action “without prepayment of fees or security” by a person who is unable to pay such fees). Plaintiff’s affidavit makes the required financial showing, and so plaintiff’s request is granted. The federal in forma pauperis statute authorizes federal courts to dismiss a case if the action is legally “frivolous or malicious,” fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Further, the federal court has an independent duty to ensure it has subject matter jurisdiction in the case. See United Investors Life Ins. Co. v. Waddell & Reed Inc., 360 F.3d…

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.