Struve

(PC) Evans v. Struve

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaNovember 12, 20202:19-cv-01376California745 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 DAVID EVANS, No. 2: 19-cv-1376 JAM KJN P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 D. STRUVE, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel, with a civil rights action pursuant 18 to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. For the reasons stated herein, the undersigned recommends that plaintiff’s 19 claim alleging that defendants Gonzalez, Dingfelder, Richardson, Calderon, Valice, Sidebotham 20 and McCarval violated the Eighth Amendment by filing reports falsely claiming that plaintiff 21 resisted defendant Struve be dismissed for failing to state a potentially colorable claim for relief. 22 See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) (notwithstanding any filing fee, the court shall dismiss case at any 23 time the court determines that the action fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted). 24 In the August 2, 2019 order directing service of defendants, the undersigned found that 25 plaintiff’s complaint stated the following…

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.