Bick

(PC) Tunstall v. Bick

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaOctober 25, 20212:16-cv-02604California889 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ROBERT WILLIAM TUNSTALL, JR., No. 2:16-CV-2604-KJM-DMC-P Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS JOSEPH BICK, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Following submission of the operative third amended complaint, the Court issued a screening order. See ECF No. 60. The Court concluded the third amended complaint was sufficient to state cognizable claims as to some defendants but not others. See id. Specifically, the Court stated that Plaintiff alleges sufficient facts in his first, third, fourth, fifth, and sixth claims, but not in his second, seventh, eighth, ninth, and tenth claims. See id. at 4. Plaintiff was provided an opportunity to file a fourth amended complaint to address deficient claims. See id. at 12. / / / / / / / / / Following extensions of time, see ECF Nos. 62 and 65, Plaintiff filed…

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.