Legal Opinion

(PS) Rogers v. Valero

District Court, E.D. California

Decided April 17, 2025No. 2:25-cv-00488Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 NICOLE JEAN ROGERS, No. 2:25-cv-00488-DC-CKD (PS) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER GRANTING IFP REQUEST 14 VALERO, et. al., AND DISMISSING WITH LEAVE TO 15 AMEND Defendants. 16 17 18 Plaintiff Nicole Jean Rogers proceeds pro se in this action which was referred to the 19 undersigned by Local Rule 302(c)(21) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). Plaintiff has filed an 20 application in support of her request to proceed in forma pauperis which makes the showing 21 required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). (ECF No. 2.) The…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  3. Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  4. Neitzke v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  5. Lopez v. SmithCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API