Rucker

(PS) Tafari v. Rucker

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 3, 20242:22-cv-01666California752 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 RAS HEZEKIAH TAFARI, No. 2:22-cv-01666-DAD-JDP (PS) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING

14 YVETTE TUCKER, et al., THIS ACTION 15 Defendants. (Doc. No. 8) 16 17 Plaintiff Ras Hezekiah Tafari, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, initiated this civil 18 action on September 22, 2022. (Doc. No. 1.) This matter was referred to a United States 19 Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On May 15, 2023, the assigned magistrate judge screened plaintiff’s first amended 21 complaint and found that plaintiff’s allegations were insufficient to state his sole federal claim 22 brought in this action—a federal claim for employment discrimination on account of religion 23 under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000(e)-2. (Doc. No. 5 at 2.) The gravamen 24 of plaintiff’s claim is that defendant Federal Express Corporation “violated federal law by 25 rescinding…

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.