Hobbs v. Santiago

1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Richard Paul Hobbs, No. CV-20-00787-PHX-JAT 10 Plaintiff, ORDER 11 v. 12 Michael Santiago, et al., 13 Defendants. 14 15 This Court’s prior order granted Plaintiff Richard Paul Hobbs’s (“Plaintiff”) motion 16 to proceed in forma pauperis but struck his complaint because it was so illegible that the 17 Court could not perform its required screening function. (Doc. 7 at 1–2). Plaintiff’s 18 amended complaint is now pending (Doc. 11) and the Court will screen it. 19 I. STATUTORY SCREENING 20 Under 28 U.S.C. §…