Legal Opinion
(PC) McGee v. Galager
District Court, E.D. California
Decided February 16, 2024No. 1:21-cv-00837Unknown
1Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOHNNY MCGEE, Case No. 1:21-cv-00837-NODJ-HBK (PC) 12 Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO DISMISS CASE1 13 v. (Doc. No. 18) 14 GALAGER, PATTERSON, YOKUM and WRIGHT, FOURTEEN-DAY OBJECTION PERIOD 15 Defendants. 16 17 Pending before the Court for screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A is Plaintiff’s First 18 Amended Complaint. (Doc. No. 18, “FAC”). For the reasons set forth below, the undersigned 19 recommends the district court dismiss the FAC because it fails to state any cognizable federal 20 claim.…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- J. Wilkerson v. B. WheelerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
- Michael Henry Ferdik v. Joe Bonzelet, SheriffCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
- Lavonne BAXTER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Louis SULLIVAN, M.D., Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.