Valencia

(PC) McClintock v. Valencia

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJune 14, 20212:21-cv-00850California841 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JOHN SCOTT McCLINTOCK, No. 2:21-cv-0850-TLN-EFB P Plaintiff, v. ORDER G. VALENCIA, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In addition to filing a complaint and an “addendum” thereto (ECF Nos. 1 & 4), he has also filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2). Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis Plaintiff’s application makes the showing required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1) and (2). Accordingly, by separate order, the court directs the agency having custody of plaintiff to collect and forward the appropriate monthly payments for the filing fee as set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1) and (2). Screening Order Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in which prisoners seek redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental…

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.