Holmes

(PC) Ramnanan v. Holmes

Bad Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaOctober 8, 20212:21-cv-01113California4,453 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ANDRE RAMNANAN, No. 2:21-cv-1113 KJN P Plaintiff, v. ORDER B. HOLMES, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding pro se. Plaintiff seeks relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff paid the filing fee. This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 302 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). As discussed below, plaintiff’s complaint is dismissed with leave to amend. Screening Standards The court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner raised claims that are legally “frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1), (2). A claim is legally…

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.