Galager

(PC) McGee v. Galager

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaFebruary 16, 20241:21-cv-00837California3,055 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOHNNY MCGEE, Case No. 1:21-cv-00837-NODJ-HBK (PC) 12 Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO

DISMISS CASE1

13 v. (Doc. No. 18) 14 GALAGER, PATTERSON, YOKUM and

WRIGHT, FOURTEEN-DAY OBJECTION PERIOD

15 Defendants. 16 17 Pending before the Court for screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A is Plaintiff’s First 18 Amended Complaint. (Doc. No. 18, “FAC”). For the reasons set forth below, the undersigned 19 recommends the district court dismiss the FAC because it fails to state any cognizable federal 20 claim. 21 SCREENING REQUIREMENT 22 A plaintiff who commences an action while in prison is subject to the Prison Litigation 23 Reform Act (“PLRA”), which requires, inter alia, the court to screen a complaint that seeks relief 24 against a governmental entity, its officers, or its employees before directing service upon any 25 defendant. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. This requires the court to identify any cognizable claims and 26 dismiss the…

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.