Bey

Bey v. Schneider

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaAugust 3, 20233:23-cv-01042California1,957 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 BRITANYA RANITA BEY, Case No. 23-cv-1042-BAS-BGS

Plaintiff,

ORDER:

v. (1) GRANTING IN FORMA STEVE SCHNEIDER, et al.,

PAUPERIS APPLICTION (ECF

Defendants. No. 2); and

16 (2) DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITHOUT PREJUDICE

PURSUANT TO

18 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)

20 Proceeding pro se, Plaintiff Britanya Ranita Bey (“Bey”) brought this civil action on June 5, 2023. (Compl., ECF No. 1.) That same day, Bey filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). (IFP App., ECF No. 2.) For the reasons set forth below, the Court GRANTS Bey’s IFP Application (ECF No. 2), DISMISSES without prejudice the Complaint (ECF No. 1); and GRANTS Bey leave to file a First Amended Complaint. I. IFP APPLICATION All parties instituting any civil action, suit, or proceeding in a district court of the United States, except an application for writ of habeas corpus, must pay a filing fee of $400. …

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.