Cates

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JASON GERAY, Case No. 1:21-cv-00593-AWI-HBK (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S

13 v. CONSTRUED MOTION 14 BRIAN CATES, K. NOUWEIS, (Doc. No. 16) 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, Jason Geray, a pretrial detainee is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis on 18 his initial Complaint filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Doc. Nos. 1, 10). Pending before the Court 19 is Plaintiff’s construed motion requesting the Court to screen his Complaint. (Doc. No. 16). 20 Plaintiff also requests that the Court provide him a copy of the instant motion. (Id. at 3). 21 Request to Screen Complaint 22 District courts possess inherent authority not governed “by rule or statute, but by control 23 necessarily vested in courts to manage their own affairs so as to achieve the orderly and 24 expeditious disposition of cases.” Dietz v. Bouldin, 136 S. Ct. 1885, 1892 (2016) (citations 25 omitted). And while this Court…