Valencia

(PC) McClintock v. Valencia

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaAugust 26, 20212:21-cv-00850California1,106 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 this action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. After the dismissal of his original complaint on screening1 (ECF Nos. 1 & 10), plaintiff has filed an amended complaint (ECF No. 13), which the court must now screen. As discussed below, plaintiff’s amended complaint is dismissed with leave to amend for failure to state a claim. Plaintiff’s amended complaint names approximately nineteen defendants and suggests that they retaliated against plaintiff for pursuing earlier claims. ECF No. 13 at 2-3. The gist of the complaint is that these defendants are either (1) defendants in a separate civil lawsuit plaintiff is

1 Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in which prisoners seek redress from a governmental entity or officer or…

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.