Stebbins

Stebbins v. Doe

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaFebruary 12, 20243:23-cv-00321California1,988 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 DAVID A. STEBBINS, Case No. 23-cv-00321-DMR

8 Plaintiff,

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

9 v. LEAVE TO FILE MOTION FOR

RECONSIDERATION

10 JOHN DOE, Re: Dkt. No. 23 11 Defendant.

12 Plaintiff David A. Stebbins filed a complaint and an application for leave to proceed in 13 forma pauperis (“IFP”) on January 20, 2023, along with a motion for issuance of a subpoena duces 14 tecum on February 7, 2023. [Docket Nos. 1 (“Compl.”), 2, 6.] He alleges ten counts of 15 defamation against an anonymous YouTube user known as “SidAlpha.” Compl. ¶ 2. Specifically, 16 Plaintiff contends that on February 12, 2022, SidAlpha posted a video on his YouTube channel 17 “dedicated to smearing” him. Id. ¶ 7. 18 On May 22, 2023, the court granted Plaintiff’s IFP application and explained that it would 19 review Plaintiff’s motion for early discovery prior to screening the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 20 1915. The court denied the motion without prejudice to Plaintiff’s ability to file…

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.