Martin
Felice Lazae Martin, et al. v. Michael Castillo, et al.
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9 10 FELICE LAZAE MARTIN, et al., Case No. 1:25-cv-01123-KES-CDB
11 Plaintiffs, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT
12 v. WITH LEAVE TO AMEND
13 MICHAEL CASTILLO, et al., (Docs. 1, 22)
14 Defendants. 14-DAY DEADLINE
15 16 Plaintiffs Felice Lazae Martin and Hector Joseph Borges (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), 17 proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis (“IFP”), initiated this action with the filing of a complaint 18 on September 4, 2025. (Doc. 1). 19 On September 22, 2025, following the completion of a preliminary review of Plaintiffs’ 20 complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, the undersigned entered an order directing Plaintiffs to 21 file a response. (Doc. 22). In short, the undersigned determined that Plaintiffs had failed to 22 demonstrate that this Court properly may exercise subject matter jurisdiction over their claims and 23 did not sufficiently plead any cognizable claims under federal law. The undersigned directed 24 Plaintiffs to file within 21 days either an…