Bradley v. Tuolumne County Superior Court et al

Filing 3

ORDER Granting 2 IFP signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 4/8/2015. (Martinez, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

RODNEY EUGENE BRADLEY,

11
12

15-cv-00531-LJO-GSA

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER GRANTING IFP

13
14
15
16
17

TUOLUMNE COUNTY SUPERIOR
COURT, ELEANOR PROVOST, and
DONALD SEGERSTROM,

(ECF No. 2)

Defendants.
Plaintiff Rodney Bradley (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint on April 6, 2015 and an

18
19

application to proceed in forma pauperis on that same day. (ECF Nos. 1, 2). Plaintiff has made

20

the required showing pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). Accordingly, the request to proceed in

21

forma pauperis is GRANTED.

22
23
24

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), the Court conducts an initial review of all pro se
complaints for legal sufficiency. The Court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if it
determines that the action is legally “frivolous or malicious,” fails to state a claim upon which

25
26
27
28

relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief.
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). If the Court determines that the complaint fails to state a claim, leave to
amend may be granted to the extent that the deficiencies of the complaint may be cured by
1

1

amendment. Plaintiff is advised that the Court will screen his complaint in due course and issue

2

an order addressing the legal sufficiency of his claims. The Court’s screening order will be served

3

on Plaintiff by U.S. mail.

4
5
6
7

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

April 8, 2015

/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2