Legal Opinion

Askia Sankofa Ashanti v. Department of Consumer Affairs, et al.

District Court, E.D. California

Decided February 26, 2026No. 2:25-cv-00162Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ASKIA SANKOFA ASHANTI, No. 2:25-cv-00162-DAD-SCR 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 Plaintiff is proceeding pro se in this matter, which is referred to the undersigned pursuant 19 to Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Plaintiff filed a motion for leave to proceed 20 in forma pauperis (“IFP”), which was granted. ECF No. 6. The Court issued a screening order 21 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, and concluded that Plaintiff’s complaint…

2Cases cited18 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. Neitzke v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  5. Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974

13 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