(PC)Karas

(PC)Karas v. CDCR

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaOctober 7, 20202:20-cv-01488California1,113 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MAGED LABIB KARAS, No. 2:20-cv-1488-JDP P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF

CORRECTIONS AND

15 REHABILITATION, et al., 16 Defendants. 17 18 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 19 U.S.C. § 1983. He has paid the filing fee. As discussed below, plaintiff’s complaint is dismissed 20 withleave to amend. 21 ScreeningStandards 22 Federal courts are required to screen cases in which prisoners seek redress from a 23 governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. 24 § 1915A(a). The court must identify cognizable claims or dismiss the complaint, or any portion 25 of the complaint, if the complaint “is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which 26 relief may be granted,” or “seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such 27 relief.” Id.§ 1915A(b). 28 ///// 1 A pro se plaintiff, like other…

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.