From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Dunsmore v. Horn

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Nov 15, 2021
2:21-cv-01938 TLN DB P (E.D. Cal. Nov. 15, 2021)

Opinion

2:21-cv-01938 TLN DB P

11-15-2021

DARRYL DUNSMORE, Plaintiff, v. PAUL HORN, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

DEBORAH BARNES, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff has filed a “Motion for Contempt and Sanctions to Compel Discovery” with the court. (ECF No. 9.)

Prior to defendants appearing, the court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against a governmental entity or an officer or employee of a governmental entity. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are legally “frivolous or malicious, ” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) & (2).

The court has not yet screened plaintiff's complaint to determine if it states any cognizable claims. As such, the court has not ordered defendants appear in this action. The court has also not issued a discovery and scheduling order in this action. As such, the court will deny plaintiffs motions as premature. Plaintiff's complaint will be screened in due course.

For the reasons stated above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff s motion for contempt and sanctions to compel discovery (ECF No. 9) is denied.


Summaries of

Dunsmore v. Horn

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Nov 15, 2021
2:21-cv-01938 TLN DB P (E.D. Cal. Nov. 15, 2021)
Case details for

Dunsmore v. Horn

Case Details

Full title:DARRYL DUNSMORE, Plaintiff, v. PAUL HORN, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Nov 15, 2021

Citations

2:21-cv-01938 TLN DB P (E.D. Cal. Nov. 15, 2021)