Mueller

(PS) Expose v. Mueller

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaNovember 10, 20212:21-cv-01375California1,761 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 LINDA ROSE EXPOSE, No. 2:21-cv-1375 KJM DB PS Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS CHIEF JUDGE KIMBERLY MUELLER, et al. 15 Defendants. 17 Plaintiff Linda Rose Expose is proceeding in this action pro se. This matter was referred to the undersigned in accordance with Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Pending before the court are plaintiff’s amended complaint and application to proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF Nos. 2, 4.) The amended complaint raises “OBJECTION TO THE JUDGES ORDER” with respect to orders issued in other actions filed by plaintiff in this court. (Am. Compl. (ECF No. 4) at 1.) The court is required to screen complaints brought by parties proceeding in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2); see also Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1129 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc). Here, plaintiff’s amended complaint is deficient. Accordingly, for the reasons stated below, the undersigned…

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.