(PC)Watkins

(PC)Watkins v. Klein

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJanuary 11, 20212:20-cv-01360California4,262 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 MAURICE WATKINS, No. 2:20-cv-1360 DB P Plaintiff, v. ORDER JEFF LYNCH, et al., Defendants. 15 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff alleges prison officials violated his rights in connection with an incident in which plaintiff was attacked by fellow inmates. Presently before the court, is plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2) and his complaint for screening (ECF No. 1). For the reasons set forth below, the court will grant the motion to proceed in forma pauperis and give plaintiff the option to proceed with the complaint as screened or amend the complaint. IN FORMA PAUPERIS Plaintiff has submitted a declaration that makes the showing required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). (ECF No. 2.) Accordingly, the request to proceed in forma pauperis will be granted. Plaintiff is required to pay 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.