Legal Opinion

Rasheed v. United States Government Agent

District Court, N.D. California

Decided October 3, 2025No. 3:25-cv-04096Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 TAHEE A. RASHEED, Case No. 25-cv-04096-TSH 8 Plaintiff, SECOND SCREENING ORDER 9 v. PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) 10 UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT AGENT, et al., 11 Defendants. 12 13 14 I. INTRODUCTION 15 On May 19, 2025, the Court granted Plaintiff Tahee A. Rasheed’s application to proceed in 16 forma pauperis and screened the complaint, finding it deficient under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). ECF 17 No. 4. Plaintiff has now filed a First Amended Complaint. ECF No. 11. For the reasons stated 18 below, the Court finds the amended…

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. Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
  4. Neitzke v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  5. City of Canton v. HarrisSupreme Court of the United States · 1989

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