Tapiz

(PC) Shannon v. Tapiz

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMay 24, 20232:22-cv-01504California2,025 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MICHAEL TYRONE SHANNON, No. 2:22-cv-1504 AC P Plaintiff, v. ORDER J. TAPIZ, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, seeks relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. By order filed March 6, 2023, the undersigned screened the complaint and found that it did not state a claim for relief. ECF No. 8. Plaintiff was given an opportunity to file an amended complaint and has now filed a second amended complaint. ECF No. 12. I. Statutory Screening of Prisoner Complaints The court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against “a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are “frivolous, malicious, or fail[] to state a claim upon which relief may be granted,” or that “seek[] monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from…

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.