Kandi v. Management and Training Corporation et al
ORDER GRANTING 27 Motion for Case Status and Update and DENYING Motion for Screening signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 8/18/2017. (Sant Agata, S)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
EMIEL A. KANDI,
MANAGEMENT AND TRAINING
CORPORATION, et al.,
Case No. 1:16-cv-00794-AWI-BAM (PC)
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR CASE
STATUS AND UPDATE AND DENYING
MOTION FOR SCREENING
(ECF No. 27)
Plaintiff Emiel A. Kandi (“Plaintiff”) is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma
pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.1 Plaintiff initiated this action on
June 8, 2016. (ECF No. 1.) On August 16, 2017, Plaintiff filed the instant motion for case status
and update and motion for screening. (ECF No. 27.) Plaintiff’s request for status of case is
granted, as follows:
On May 15, 2017, the Court issued an order granting Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file an
oversized first amended complaint, screening and dismissing the first amended complaint, and
granting Plaintiff leave to file a second amended complaint. (ECF No. 24.) Plaintiff filed a
second amended complaint on June 1, 2017.
Plaintiff purports to bring his complaint in part under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. As Plaintiff has previously been informed,
suits against federal officers for the violation of constitutional rights should be brought under Bivens v. Six Unknown
Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971).
With respect to Plaintiff’s motion for screening, Plaintiff is reminded that 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 screens
complaints in the order in which they are filed and strives to avoid delays whenever possible.
However, there are hundreds of prisoner civil rights cases presently pending before the Court, and
delays are inevitable despite the Court’s best efforts. Due to the heavy caseload, Plaintiff’s
complaint is still awaiting screening. The Court is aware of the pendency of this case and will
screen Plaintiff’s complaint in due course. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion for screening of his
complaint (ECF No. 27) is HEREBY DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
August 18, 2017
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?