Vladimir Korostelev v. Steve Gordon, et al.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 VLADIMIR KOROSTELEV, No. 2:25-cv-1831-DAD-CKD (PS) Plaintiff, 12 v. ORDER 13 STEVE GORDON, et al., 14 Defendants.

16 Plaintiff Vladimir Korostelev proceeds in forma pauperis and without counsel and alleges he was denied a full-term California driver’s license in violation of his rights under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Because plaintiff proceeds without counsel, this action is referred to the undersigned by Local Rule 302(c)(21) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. Plaintiff’s first amended complaint (“FAC”) is before the court for screening. I. Screening Requirement Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), the court must screen every in forma pauperis proceeding, and must order dismissal of the case if it is “frivolous or malicious,” “fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted,” or “seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B); Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122,…