Ndoh

(PC) Urmancheev v. Ndoh

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 17, 20241:21-cv-00255California381 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ALIM S. URMANCHEEV, No. 1:21-cv-00255 JLT HBK (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS, DISMISSING THE

13 v. ACTION FOR FAILURE TO STATE A

CLAIM, AND DIRECTING THE CLERK OF

14 R. NDOH, et al., COURT TO CLOSE THE CASE 15 Defendants. (Doc. 22) 16 17 Alim S. Urmancheev is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action 18 filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The assigned magistrate judge screened Plaintiff’s amended 19 complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, and found Plaintiff failed to state a cognizable claim. 20 Because the Court previously provided the applicable standards and Plaintiff failed to cure the 21 pleading deficiencies, the magistrate judge found further leave to amend would be futile and 22 recommended the case be dismissed. (Doc. 22.) 23 The Court served the Findings and Recommendations on Plaintiff and notified him that 24 any objections were due within 14 days. (Doc. 22…

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.