Starr

(PC) Millare v. Starr

Bad Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJanuary 28, 20222:20-cv-02072California418 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MORIANO MILLARE, No. 2:20-cv-2072 KJM AC P Plaintiff, v. ORDER M. STARR, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, seeks relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The action was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On December 21, 2021, the court screened the complaint and determined that some of the claims were cognizable, while others were not. ECF No. 10. Plaintiff was directed to inform the court whether he wished to proceed on the cognizable claims only, or to amend the complaint. Id. at 9-11. He was provided with a form with which to do so. Id. On January 3, 2022, plaintiff returned a document of his own crafting which details plaintiff’s intentions regarding each claim. ECF No. 13. It is apparent that plaintiff wishes to amend his complaint rather than voluntarily dismiss any claims. Accordingly,…

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.