Scott

Scott v. Emanuel

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaJanuary 24, 20233:22-cv-01955California1,686 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 JOHN A. SCOTT, Case No.: 22-CV-1955-GPC-AGS

Plaintiff,

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S

v. MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA

PAUPERIS; SUA SPONTE

VICKIE EMANUEL AND SHERYL

DISMISSING COMPLAINT FOR

TURCOTTE,

FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM Defendants. AND FOR LACK OF SUBJECT

MATTER JURISDICTION; AND

DENYING MOTION TO APPOINT

COUNSEL AS MOOT

[Dkt. Nos. 2, 3]

19 On December 9, 2022, Plaintiff John A. Scott, proceeding pro se, filed a complaint 20 against Defendants Vickie Emanuel and Sheryl Turcotte. (Dkt. No. 1, Compl.) Plaintiff 21 concurrently filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) 22 (“IFP”) and a motion to appoint counsel. (Dkt. Nos. 2-3.) For the reasons set forth 23 below, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s motion to proceed IFP, sua sponte DISMISSES the 24 action for failure to state a claim pursuant to 28…

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.