Jenkins

James Jenkins v. Sanger Police Department, et al.

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaNovember 14, 20251:25-cv-00544California7,570 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 JAMES JENKINS, Case No. 1:25-cv-00544-KES-BAM 12 Plaintiff, SCREENING ORDER GRANTING

PLAINTIFF LEAVE TO FILE A FIRST

13 v. AMENDED COMPLAINT OR NOTIFY

COURT OF WILLINGNESS TO PROCEED

14 SANGER POLICE DEPARTMENT, et al., ON COGNIZABLE CLAIM 15 Defendants. (Doc. 1) 16 THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE 17 18 Plaintiff James Jenkins (“Plaintiff”) is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this 19 civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and state law. Plaintiff’s signed complaint, filed May 20 8, 2025, is currently before the Court for screening. (Doc. 1.) 21 I. SCREENING REQUIREMENT AND STANDARD 22 The Court screens complaints brought by persons proceeding pro se and in forma 23 pauperis. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Plaintiff’s complaint, or any portion thereof, is subject to 24 dismissal if it is frivolous or malicious, if it fails to state a claim upon which relief may be 25 granted, or if it seeks monetary…

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.