Bhandary

Samita Bhandary v. Julie A. Emede

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaDecember 8, 20255:25-cv-05830California1,925 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 SAMITA BHANDARY, Case No. 25-cv-05830-EKL

Plaintiff,

ORDER DISMISSING AMENDED

v. COMPLAINT

JULIE A. EMEDE, Re: Dkt. No. 8 Defendant.

12 On July 11, 2025, self-represented Plaintiff Samita Bhandary filed this action and an application to proceed in forma pauperis. See ECF No. 1 (“Complaint”), No. 2 (“IFP Application”). In the original complaint, Bhandary alleged that she was labeled a “vexatious litigant” in state court. She claims that her designation as a vexatious litigant violates her rights to due process and equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment. She asserted one cause of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Defendant Judge Julie A. Emede of the Santa Clara County Superior Court, seeking injunctive relief from her vexatious litigant designation. On July 18, 2025, the Court granted Bhandary’s application to proceed in forma pauperis and screened the complaint. ECF No. 3 (“Order”). The Court…

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.