DEA

(PC) Van Huisen v. DEA

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJuly 21, 20232:23-cv-01116California1,721 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 GREGORY S. VAN HUISEN, No. 2:23-cv-1116 KJN P Plaintiff, v. ORDER DRUG ENFORCEMENT AGENCY, et al., 15 Defendants.

17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis. Plaintiff seeks relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 302 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On June 30, 2023, plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed, and he was granted thirty days to file an amended complaint. Plaintiff’s filing is before the court. As discussed below, the undersigned declines to consider the filing as an amended complaint, and grants plaintiff sixty days to file an amended complaint that complies with the court’s orders. Screening Standards 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…

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.