Williams v. United States Marshals
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 BILLY PAUL WILLIAMS, Case No.: 22-cv-0139-BAS-BLM #61027298,
ORDER: (1) SCREENING SECOND
Plaintiff, AMENDED PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. vs. § 1915(e)(2)(B) AND § 1915A(b); AND
U.S. MARSHAL DOE #1, U.S.
(2) DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO
MARSHAL DOE #2,
PROVIDE WRITTEN NOTICE
Defendants. IDENTIFYING DOE DEFENDANTS FOR SERVICE OF PROCESS 18 I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Billy Paul Williams is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis against Defendants U.S. Marshal Doe #1 and U.S. Marshal Doe #2. Under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2) and 1915A(b), the Court has a duty to screen Plaintiff’s claims sua sponte. Having reviewed the filings, the Court concludes that Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint clears the “low threshold” of sua sponte screening. The Court, however, is unable to serve Doe defendants. As a result, the Court will require Plaintiff…