Muehlemann

Muehlemann v. Santillan

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJune 22, 20231:23-cv-00727California443 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 MICHAEL EDWARD MUEHLEMANN, Case No. 1:23-cv-00727-ADA-EPG et al., FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, Plaintiffs, RECOMMENDING THAT THIS ACTION BE DISMISSED, WITHOUT PREJUDICE v. OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, DUE WITHIN FERNANDO SANTILLAN, et al.,

FOURTEEN (14) DAYS

13 Defendants.

14 15 Plaintiffs Michael Edward Muehlemann and Lavonda Louise Ireland, proceeding pro se, filed this lawsuit on May 11, 2023. (ECF No. 1). The complaint contains few factual allegations, but generally indicates that a city manager failed to protect their civil rights. Plaintiffs also filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP). (ECF No. 2). 19 Because the IFP application did not contain both Plaintiffs’ financial information and 20 because the information provided appeared to conflict with information provided in a separate 21 case, the Court directed each Plaintiff to provide a new IFP application, or pay the $402 filing fee, 22 by no later than June…

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.