(PS) Vicari v. Jackson

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaDecember 19, 20232:21-cv-02117California1,182 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 STEPHEN F. SNOW, No. 2:23-cv-02117-KJM-EFB (PC) Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 JEFF MACOMBER, et al., 15 Defendants.

17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He has paid the filing fee. Screening Standards Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in which prisoners seek redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The court must identify cognizable claims or dismiss the complaint, or any portion of the complaint, if the complaint “is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted,” or “seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief.” Id. § 1915A(b). A pro se plaintiff, like other litigants, must satisfy the pleading requirements of Rule 8(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Rule 8(a)(2) “requires a…

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.