Palacios

(PC) Singanonh v. Palacios

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 29, 20201:18-cv-00763California2,566 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

I. BACKGROUND

18 Tiengkham Singanonh (“Plaintiff”) is a former state prisoner proceeding pro se and in 19 forma pauperis with this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On May 24, 2018, 20 Plaintiff filed the Complaint commencing this action. (ECF No. 1.) At the time of the events at 21 issue in the Complaint Plaintiff was a federal pretrial detainee in custody at the Fresno County 22 Jail. On April 3, 2020, the Court dismissed the Complaint for failure to state a claim under § 23 1983, with leave to amend. (ECF No. 20.) On April 27, 2020, Plaintiff filed the First Amended 24 Complaint, which is now before the court for screening. 28 U.S.C. § 1915. (ECF No. 21.)

II. SCREENING REQUIREMENT

26 The court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against a 27 governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The 28 court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are legally “frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28…

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.