Williams v. Aetna Inc

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMay 4, 20211:21-cv-00321California6,381 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 PRINCE PAUL RAYMOND WILLIAMS, No. 1:21-cv-00321-NONE-EPG (PS) Plaintiff, SCREENING ORDER v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS,

RECOMMENDING THAT PLAINTIFF’S

AETNA INC., et al., FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT BE

DISMISSED, WITHOUT LEAVE TO

Defendants. AMEND (ECF NO. 5) TWENTY-ONE-DAY DEADLINE 18 19 Plaintiff Prince Paul Raymond Williams (“Plaintiff”) is proceeding pro se and in forma 20 pauperis in this action. Plaintiff filed the Complaint commencing this action on March 3, 2021, (ECF No. 1), which the Court screened and found failed to state any claims on March 23, 2021, (ECF No. 4). Plaintiff filed the first amended complaint (“FAC”) on April 9, 2021. (ECF No. 5). The FAC, which is now before the Court for screening, brings claims against his former employer and supervisors. The Court finds that the Complaint fails to state any cognizable claims. For the reasons…

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.