Kaufman

Kaufman v. CDCR

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaNovember 4, 20224:22-cv-05043California2,170 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

INTRODUCTION

13 Plaintiff, a California parolee proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights case under 42 U.S.C. 14 § 1983. The operative complaint is the amended complaint. He has paid the filing fee. For the 15 reasons discussed below, the amended complaint is ordered served upon Defendant Miley. All 16 other claims are dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.

ANALYSIS

A. STANDARD OF REVIEW

19 Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in which prisoners seek 20 redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. 21 1915A(a). In its review the court must identify any cognizable claims, and dismiss any claims 22 which are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seek 23 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. Id. at 1915A(b)(1),(2). Pro se 24 pleadings must be liberally construed. Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep't, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th 25 Cir. 1990). 26 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) requires only "a short and plain statement of the 27 claim showing that the pleader is entitled to…

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.