(PS) Sanders v. Sacramento Sheriff's Department

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaOctober 24, 20222:22-cv-01232California2,476 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SASSUS SANDERS, No. 2:22-cv-01232-TLN-CKD PS Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER

SACRAMENTO SHERIFF’S

DEPARTMENT, et al., Defendants. 17 Plaintiff proceeds without counsel and seeks relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The first amended complaint filed on September 23, 2022, is before the court for screening. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e).1 The allegations of the amended complaint do not state a cognizable claim. Plaintiff will have an opportunity to file a further amended complaint. In any further amended complaint, plaintiff shall describe in specific terms how each named defendant is involved in the alleged violations. I. SCREENING AND PLEADING STANDARDS Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), the court must screen every in forma pauperis proceeding, and must order dismissal of the case if it is “frivolous or malicious,” “fails to state a 27 1 This matter was referred to the undersigned pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21). See 28 U.S.C. § 28 …

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.