Fields v. Adam et al
Filing
10
ORDER Denying Motion For Court To Screen Plaintiff's Complaint (Doc. No. 9 ),signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 7/23/2010. (Scrivner, E)
(PC) Fields v. Adam et al
Doc. 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 KEVIN E. FIELDS, 9 Plaintiff, 10 v. 11 DERRAL G. ADAMS, et al., 12 Defendants. 13 / 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Plaintiff Kevin Fields ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion for Court to Screen [ECF No. 9] asking the Court to screen his complaint. The Court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The Court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are legally "frivolous or malicious," that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1),(2). The Court will direct the United States Marshal to serve Plaintiff's complaint only after the Court has screened the complaint and determined that it contains cognizable claims for relief against the named Defendants. The Court has a very large number of prisoner civil rights cases pending before it. The Court addresses these complaints in the order in which they are filed. Plaintiff's complaint will be screened accordingly and in due course. (ECF No. 9) ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR COURT TO SCREEN PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT CASE NO. 1:09-cv-1770-MJS (PC)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Dockets.Justia.com
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Accordingly, Plaintiff's Motion for Court to Screen [ECF No. 9] is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: ci4d6 July 23, 2010 /s/ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Michael J. Seng
-2-
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?