Briggs

Briggs v. Addenton

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 2, 20203:20-cv-01117California483 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6 7 RONNIE BRIGGS, No. C 20-1117 WHA (PR) 8 Plaintiff, ORDER OF DISMISSAL 9 v.

BRIAN ADDENTION; WARREN

GLASPER; JAMES CHAPMAN;

ARRON K. BAKER,

12 Defendants. / 14 Plaintiff filed this pro se civil rights case under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He has not paid the 15 filing fee and has been sent a Plaintiff is granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis in a 16 separate order. For the reasons discussed below, the complaint is dismissed for failure to state a 17 claim upon which relief may be granted. 18 Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in which prisoners or 19 individuals seeking to proceed in forma pauperis seek redress from a governmental entity or 20 officer or employee of a governmental entity and identify any cognizable claims, and dismiss 21 any claims which are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim upon which relief may be 22 granted, or seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. See 28 23 U.S.C. 1915A;…

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.