Legal Opinion

(PS) Van Den Heuvel v. Dorothy

District Court, E.D. California

Decided January 10, 2022No. 2:21-cv-02176Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JEAN MARC VAN DEN HEUVEL, No. 2:21–cv–2176–TLN–CKD PS 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER GRANTING IFP REQUEST & GRANTING LEAVE TO AMEND 14 DOROTHY, et al., (ECF Nos. 1-2) 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, who is proceeding without counsel in this action, seeks leave to proceed in forma 18 pauperis (“IFP”).1 (ECF No. 2.) See

28 U.S.C. § 1915

(authorizing the commencement of an 19 action “without prepayment of fees or security” by a person who is unable to pay such fees). 20 Plaintiff’s affidavit makes the required…

2Cases cited22 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. Lopez v. SmithCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
  5. Papasan v. AllainSupreme Court of the United States · 1986

17 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