Dunbar
Dunbar v. Alameda County Sheriff's Office
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
INTRODUCTION
20 Plaintiff, a California state prisoner, filed this pro se civil rights case under 42 U.S.C. § 21 1983 alleging that defendants violated his civil rights while he was housed at the Alameda 22 County Jail. The Complaint was dismissed with leave to amend, and plaintiff filed a First 23 Amended Complaint (“FAC”). For the reasons discussed below, the United States Marshall 24 shall serve certain defendants based upon plaintiff’s cognizable claims, while the claims against 25 other defendants are dismissed. 26
ANALYSIS
27 28
A. STANDARD OF REVIEW
1 redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. 2 1915A(a). In its review the court must identify any cognizable claims, and dismiss any claims 3 which are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seek 4 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. Id. at 1915A(b)(1),(2). Pro 5 se pleadings must be liberally construed. Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep't, 901 F.2d 696, 699 6 (9th Cir. 1990). 7 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) requires only "a short and plain statement of the 8 claim…