Peery

(PC) Reed v. Peery

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMay 17, 20222:20-cv-02373California2,582 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ANTHONY J. REED, No. 2:20-cv-2373 WBS AC P Plaintiff, v. ORDER R. PEERY, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Americans with Disabilities Act. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. Before the court is plaintiff’s first amended complaint (“FAC”). ECF No. 13. For the reasons stated below, plaintiff will be given a final opportunity either to amend the complaint or to proceed on the single cognizable claim identified below. I. FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Plaintiff, an inmate who is currently housed at Salinas Valley State Prison (“SVSP”), seeks relief for events that took place when he was incarcerated at Mule Creek State Prison (“MCSP”). ECF No. 13 at 1-2. He names the following…

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.