Moghaddam
(PC) Gaddy v. Moghaddam
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MICHAEL GADDY, No. 2:16-cv-2269 JAM AC P Plaintiff, v. ORDER E. MOGHADDAM, et al., Defendants. 16 I. Introduction Plaintiff is a California inmate under the authority of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR). Plaintiff proceeds pro se with a complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and a request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. The complaint challenges medical care that plaintiff received while incarcerated at California State Prison - Sacramento.1 This action is referred to the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302(c). For the following reasons, plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. On screening pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a), the court finds that plaintiff’s Claims One through Three (alleging deliberate indifference to plaintiff’s