(PS) Murphy v. Witbeck

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SHANNON O. MURPHY, Sr., No. 2:25-cv-00506-DAD-SCR 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 STACY WITBECK, 15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff is proceeding pro se in this action, which was accordingly referred to the 18 undersigned pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21). Plaintiff has filed a request for leave to proceed 19 in forma pauperis (“IFP”) and has submitted the affidavit required by that statute. See 28 U.S.C. 20 § 1915(a)(1). The motion to proceed IFP will therefore be granted. However, for the reasons 21 provided…