Ronald L. Seay v. California Department of Corrections/Rehabilitation, et al.

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaNovember 17, 20251:25-cv-00177California3,302 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RONALD L. SEAY, No. 1:25-cv-000177-KES-SAB (PC) 12 Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO

DISMISS ACTION FOR FAILURE TO

13 v. STATE A COGNIZABLE CLAIM FOR

RELIEF

14 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS/REHABILITATION, et (ECF Nos. 16, 19) 15 al., 16 Defendants. 17 18 19 Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this action filed pursuant to 42 20 U.S.C. § 1983. 21 I. 22 BACKGROUND 23 Plaintiff filed the instant complaint on February 11, 2025. (ECF No. 1.) 24 On March 3, 2025, the Court screened the complaint, found that Plaintiff failed to state a 25 cognizable claim for relief, and granted Plaintiff thirty days to file an amended complaint. (ECF 26 No. 9.) 27 Plaintiff failed to file an amended complaint or otherwise respond to the March 3, 2025 28 order. Therefore, on May 13, 2025, the Court issued an order for Plaintiff to show cause why the 1 action should not…

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.