From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Smith v. Armstrong

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jun 3, 2022
2:21-CV-0110-KJM-DMC (E.D. Cal. Jun. 3, 2022)

Opinion

2:21-CV-0110-KJM-DMC

06-03-2022

DENNIS SMITH, JR., Plaintiff, v. BRIAN ARMSTRONG, Defendant.


ORDER

DENNIS M. COTA, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, brings this civil action. Pending before the Court is Plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, ECF No. 2. Plaintiff's complaint, and service thereof by the United States Marshal if appropriate, will be addressed separately. The Clerk of the Court shall not issue summons or set this matter for an initial scheduling conference unless specifically directed by the court to do so.

Plaintiff has submitted the affidavit required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) showing that Plaintiff is unable to prepay fees and costs or give security therefor. Plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is, therefore, granted.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Smith v. Armstrong

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jun 3, 2022
2:21-CV-0110-KJM-DMC (E.D. Cal. Jun. 3, 2022)
Case details for

Smith v. Armstrong

Case Details

Full title:DENNIS SMITH, JR., Plaintiff, v. BRIAN ARMSTRONG, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Jun 3, 2022

Citations

2:21-CV-0110-KJM-DMC (E.D. Cal. Jun. 3, 2022)