Phillips
Phillips v. Reinhart
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 MELCHESTER PHILLIPS, JR., Case No. 1:20-cv-01034-DAD-SAB 12 Plaintiff, SCREENING ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF LEAVE TO FILE A FIRST v. AMENDED COMPLAINT 14 MICHAEL REINHART, et al., (ECF No. 1) 15 Defendants. THIRTY (30) DAY DEADLINE
17 Melchester Phillips, Jr. (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this 18 action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Currently before the Court for screening is Plaintiff’s 19 complaint, filed July 27, 2020. (ECF No. 1.) 20 I.
SCREENING REQUIREMENT
22 Notwithstanding any filing fee, the court shall dismiss a case if at any time the Court 23 determines that the complaint “(i) is frivolous or malicious; (ii) fails to state a claim on which 24 relief may be granted; or (iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from 25 such relief.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2); see Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1129 (9th Cir. 2000) 26 (section 1915(e) applies to all in forma pauperis complaints, not just those filed by…