Carlsen

Soraya Maria Rigor v. Dale Carlsen, et al.

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJanuary 6, 20262:23-cv-00774California1,205 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SORAYA MARIA RIGOR, Case No. 2:23-cv-0774-DC-JDP (PS) Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS DALE CARLSEN, et al. Defendants. 16 Soraya Maria Rigor brings this action against thirty-eight named defendants and an indeterminate number of “Doe” defendants. ECF No. 11 at 3-7. The complaint is deficient in numerous ways, not least of which in its failure to contain a short and plain statement of the claims against each of the named defendants. Accordingly, I now recommend this action be dismissed without leave to amend. 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 dismiss any portion of the complaint that is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a…

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.