Chavez

(PC) Tate v. Chavez

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMarch 30, 20222:22-cv-00211California865 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 LIONEL TATE, SR., No. 2:22-cv-0211 CKD P Plaintiff, v. ORDER L. CHAVEZ, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and seeking relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 302 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Plaintiff has paid the filing fee. 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 has conducted the required screening and finds that plaintiff’s complaint violates the federal rules concerning joinder of claims. Under Rule 20 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, plaintiff cannot bring unrelated claims against different defendants. In other words, plaintiff cannot join claims against defendant B that have nothing to do with those brought against defendant A. Conclusory allegations…

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.