Martel

(PC) Alcaraz v. Martel

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaFebruary 12, 20202:19-cv-00030California1,895 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 TEDORO SEVERIANO ALCARAZ, No. 2:19-cv-0030 JAM DB P Plaintiff, v. ORDER MICHAEL MARTEL, Defendant. 16 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, seeks relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and has requested authority pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 to proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF Nos. 1, 7, 9). This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 302 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). For the reasons stated below, the court shall order plaintiff to show cause why this action should not be dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. In addition, it shall deny both of plaintiff’s motions to proceed in forma pauperis as premature. I. PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT Plaintiff’s complaint names the following California Health Care Facility employees as defendants: Warden Michael Martel, Correctional Sergeant Morris and Appeals Coordinator S. De Jesus as defendants. (See ECF No. 1 at…

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.