Fayed

Fayed v. Davis

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJanuary 3, 20244:21-cv-08206California4,685 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 JAMES MICHAEL FAYED, Case No. 21-cv-08206-JST

8 Plaintiff,

ORDER OF PARTIAL SERVICE;

9 v. DENYING REQUEST FOR

APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

10 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, et al., Re: ECF Nos. 35, 38 Defendants. 11

12 13 Plaintiff, an inmate at San Quentin State Prison (“SQSP”) has filed a pro se action 14 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. His third amended complaint (ECF No. 35) is now before the Court 15 for review under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. This order also addresses Plaintiff’s renewed motion to 16 appoint counsel. ECF No. 38. 17 DISCUSSION 18 A. Standard of Review 19 A federal court must conduct a preliminary screening in any case in which a prisoner seeks 20 redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. See 28 U.S.C. 21 § 1915A(a). In its review, the court must identify any cognizable claims and dismiss any claims 22 that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted or seek…

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.