Chappell

(PC) Adams v. Chappell

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaNovember 6, 20202:20-cv-00844California7,351 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 BRIAN TRENT ADAMS, No. 2: 20-cv-00844 KJN P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

14 KEVIN CHAPPELL, 15 Defendant. 16 17 I. Introduction 18 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel, with a civil rights action pursuant 19 to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the court is defendant’s motion to dismiss pursuant to 20 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). (ECF No. 18.) For the reasons stated herein, the 21 undersigned recommends that defendant’s motion to dismiss be granted. 22 II. Legal Standard for 12(b)(6) Motion 23 A complaint may be dismissed for “failure to state a claim upon which relief may be 24 granted.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). To survive a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, a 25 plaintiff must allege “enough facts to state a claim for relief that is plausible on its face.” Bell 26 Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007). A claim has “facial plausibility when the…

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.