Scott

Scott v. Adventist Health Bakersfield

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 19, 20241:22-cv-01334California8,475 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 FLOYD SCOTT, Case No.: 1:22-cv-01334-KES-CDB 12 Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO

DISMISS THIS ACTION FOR PLAINTIFF’S

13 v. FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM UPON

WHICH RELIEF CAN BE GRANTED

14 ADVENTIST HEALTH BAKERSFIELD, et al., (Doc. 10) 15 Defendants. 14-DAY OBJECTION DEADLINE 16

17

18 Plaintiff Floyd Scott is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action 19 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 20 I. INTRODUCTION 21 Plaintiff filed his original complaint on October 19, 2022. (Doc. 1.) 22 On November 29, 2022, the Court issued its First Screening Order. (Doc. 4.) On 23 December 14, 2022, Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint. (Doc. 7.) 24 Following issuance of this Court’s Second Screening Order on February 15, 2024 (Doc. 25 9), Plaintiff filed his second amended complaint on March 1, 2024 (Doc. 10). 26 II. SCREENING REQUIREMENT 27 The Court is required to screen complaints brought…

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.