Babb

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ANDERSON PURNELL THURSTON, Case No. 2:25-cv-1925-JDP (P) Plaintiff, v. ORDER BABB, et al., Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, a former county inmate proceeding pro se, brings this action against two Yuba County Sherriff’s Deputies, Babb and Dutt. His allegations that the defendants violated his Fourteenth Amendment rights by denying him adequate conditions of confinement are sufficient to proceed past screening. By contrast, his equal protection claim is non-cognizable as currently articulated. Plaintiff may proceed only with his cognizable claims, or he may delay serving any defendant and file another amended complaint. Screening and Pleading Requirements A federal court must screen the complaint of any claimant seeking permission to proceed in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). The court must identify any cognizable claims and 27 1 Plaintiff has filed a request to update the spelling of Duff’s name to…