Kirsch

(PC) Woods v. Kirsch

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaNovember 28, 20222:22-cv-00640California595 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 LYNN WOODS, No. 2:22-cv-00640-EFB (PC) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER

14 CHRISTOPHER SMITH, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel and in forma pauperis in an action 18 brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. After two dismissals pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A (ECF Nos. 19 8 & 12), plaintiff has filed a second amended complaint (ECF No. 13), which also must be 20 dismissed with leave to amend.1 21 In the second amended complaint (ECF No. 13), plaintiff states that he intends to pursue 22 Eighth Amendment and state law tort claims against defendants Alan Kirsch and Christopher 23 Smith. The second amended complaint must be dismissed with leave to amend, however, 24 because plaintiff has not included any request for relief. See Fed R. Civ. P 8(a)(3) (requiring that

25 1 Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in which prisoners seek redress from a governmental entity or officer or…

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.