Dixon

Williams v. Dixon

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJuly 1, 20205:20-cv-00673California989 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10

JOSEPHUS H. WILLIAMS,

11 Case No. 20-00673 EJD (PR) Plaintiff, 12 ORDER OF DISMISSAL v. 13 14 LT. DIXON, 15 Defendant. 16

17 18 Plaintiff, a state prisoner at the California State Prison (“CSP”) in Solano, filed the 19 instant pro se civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff’s motion for leave 20 to proceed in forma pauperis will be granted in a separate order. 21 22 DISCUSSION 23 A. Standard of Review 24 A federal court must conduct a preliminary screening in any case in which a 25 prisoner seeks redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a 26 governmental entity. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). In its review, the court must identify any 27 cognizable claims and dismiss any claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim 1 from such relief. See id. § 1915A(b)(1),(2). Pro se pleadings must, however, be liberally 2 construed. See Balistreri v. Pacifica…

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.