Crozier
Crozier v. Valley Health Team, Inc.
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 MARK A. CROZIER, Case No. 1:24-cv-00255-BAM 12 Plaintiff, SCREENING ORDER GRANTING
PLAINTIFF LEAVE TO AMEND
13 v. (Doc. 1) 14 VALLEY HEALTH TEAM, INC., et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Mark A. Crozier (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, initiated 18 this civil action on February 29, 2024. (Doc. 1.) Plaintiff’s complaint is currently before the 19 Court for screening. 20 I. Screening Requirement and Standard 21 The Court screens complaints brought by persons proceeding in pro se and in forma 22 pauperis. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Plaintiff’s complaint, or any portion thereof, is subject to 23 dismissal if it is frivolous or malicious, if it fails to state a claim upon which relief may be 24 granted, or if it seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 25 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). 26 A complaint must contain “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the 27 pleader is entitled to relief .…