Windom

Windom v. Environmental Protection Agency

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJuly 7, 20203:20-cv-02826California587 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 CAMERON WINDOM, Case No. 20-cv-02826-JCS

Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION

TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS

v.

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION COMPLAINT SHOULD NOT BE AGENCY, et al., DISMISSED 11 Defendants. 12 Plaintiff Cameron Windom, pro se, asserts that Defendants the Environmental Protection 13 Agency (“EPA”), Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”), and Department of 14 Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) failed to comply with requests under the Freedom of 15 Information Act (“FOIA”), 5 U.S.C. § 552. Good cause having been shown, the Court hereby 16 GRANTS Windom’s application to proceed in forma pauperis. See dkt. 2. 17 Windom’s complaint in this action is virtually identical to a complaint that he filed against 18 the Drug Enforcement Administration (“DEA”) and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms 19 (“ATF”), assigned case number 20-cv-02431. Notably, the present complaint includes language 20 from that case, which Windom presumably…

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.