Rosenlof

(PC) Anderson v. Rosenlof

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 8, 20242:23-cv-02375California3,498 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 WILLIAM B. ANDERSON, No. 2:23-cv-2375 DB P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 S. ROSENLOF, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action under 42 18 U.S.C. §1983. Before the court are plaintiff’s complaint for screening and plaintiff’s motion to 19 proceed in forma pauperis. For the reasons set forth below, this court grants plaintiff’s motion to 20 proceed in forma pauperis and dismisses the complaint with leave to amend. 21 IN FORMA PAUPERIS 22 Plaintiff has submitted a declaration that makes the showing required by 28 U.S.C. 23 §1915(a). Accordingly, the request to proceed in forma pauperis will be granted. 24 Plaintiff is required to pay the statutory filing fee of $350.00 for this action. 28 U.S.C. 25 §§1914(a), 1915(b)(1). By this order, plaintiff will be assessed an initial partial filing fee in 26 accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. §1915(b)(1). By…

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.