Espinosa

(PC) Maraglino v. Espinosa

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaNovember 21, 20221:20-cv-00825California4,828 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

11 DOROTHY GRACE MARIE 1:20-cv-00825-AWI-GSA-PC

MARAGLINO,

12 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, Plaintiff, RECOMMENDING THAT THIS CASE 13 BE DISMISSED, WITH PREJUDICE, v. FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM 14 (ECF No. 18.)

J. ESPINOSA, et al.,

15

OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, DUE WITHIN

Defendants. 16 FOURTEEN DAYS

17 18 19 20 21 22 I. BACKGROUND 23 Dorothy Grace Marie Maraglino (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in 24 forma pauperis with this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On June 15, 2020, 25 Plaintiff filed the Complaint commencing this action. (ECF No. 1.) On September 13, 2021, the 26 Court dismissed the Complaint for failure to state a claim, with leave to amend. (ECF No. 10.) 27 On February 18, 2022, Plaintiff filed the First Amended Complaint which is now before the court 28 for screening. 28 U.S.C. § 1915. (ECF No. 18.) 1 II. SCREENING REQUIREMENT 2 The Court is required to…

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.