Lozano

(PC) Chinsami v. Lozano

Bad Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaOctober 4, 20212:21-cv-01056California2,422 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SHU CHINSAMI, No. 2:21-cv-1056 DB P Plaintiff, v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

JARED LOZANO, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff alleges that a device was implanted in his eye without his consent. Presently before the court is plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 3) and his complaint (ECF No. 7) for screening. For the reasons set forth below, the court will deny the recommend the motion to proceed in forma pauperis be denied and the complaint be dismissed without leave to amend. BACKGROUND Plaintiff initiated this action by filing a letter (ECF No. 1) and a motion to proceed (ECF No. 3) in forma pauperis in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. The court construed plaintiff’s filing as an intent to file an action…

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.