Legal Opinion

Biesenbach v. DOES 1-3

District Court, N.D. California

Decided January 24, 2022No. 4:21-cv-08091Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 KLAUS BIESENBACH, Case No. 21-cv-08091-DMR 8 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING IFP 9 v. APPLICATION AND SCREENING COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. 10 JOHN DOES 1-3, § 1915(E) 11 Defendant. Re: Dkt. Nos. 1, 2, 5 12 Plaintiff Klaus Biesenbach filed a complaint (“Compl.”) and an application for leave to 13 proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). [Docket Nos. 1, 2.] He also filed an ex parte application for 14 expedited discovery. [Docket No. 5.] Having considered Biesenbach’s papers, the court grants 15 the IFP application but finds…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  3. Erickson v. PardusSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  4. Harry Franklin v. Ms. Murphy and Hoyt CuppCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1984
  5. Javiad Akhtar v. J. MesaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012

22 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