Gremmels

Gremmels v. Somkin

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaSeptember 28, 20213:21-cv-05395California1,755 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CHRISTIAN GREMMELS,

Case No. 21-cv-05395-JCS Plaintiff, 8 v. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 9 ANTHONY SOMKIN, et al., 10 Defendants.

12 I. INTRODUCTION The Court has granted Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis and therefore is required to review the sufficiency of Plaintiff’s complaint to determine whether it satisfies 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). For the reasons set forth below, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s claims are insufficiently pled. Therefore, Plaintiff is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why this case should not be dismissed. II. BACKGROUND In the Complaint, Plaintiff alleges that between 2005 and 2007, he was prescribed Cialis Extended Formula (“the Medication”) by Dr. Anthony Somkin, who was affiliated with Sutter Health (“Sutter”), “without evidence of erectile problems.” Complaint at ECF p. 4. He alleges he purchased the Medication from a Walgreens store in Oakland. Id. at ECF p. 6. According to Plaintiff, he…

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.