(PS) Coxon v. United States District Court

E.D. California

(PS) Coxon v. United States District Court

District Court, E.D. California·Decided December 3, 2021·No. 2:21-cv-00792·Unknown

Opinion

BENJAMIN COXON, Case No. 2:21-cv-00792-KJM-JDP (PS) Plaintiff, SCREENING ORDER v. ECF No. 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS Defendant. ECF No. 2 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THIS CASE BE DISMISSED OBJECTIONS DUE WITHIN 14 DAYS Plaintiff moves to proceed without prepaying filing fees. ECF No. 2. Plaintiff’s affidavit satisfies the relevant requirements, see 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), and so the motion, ECF No. 2, is granted. Having granted plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis, this complaint is now subject to screening. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). The court must dismiss any action filed in forma pauperis that is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from suit. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). Plaintiff brings this case as an attempt to have crimes investigated and criminal charges brought against unnamed individuals. ECF No. 1. Citizens cannot bring criminal charges or compel the government to bring criminal charges. Further, “criminal statutes . . . do not give rise to civil liability.” Allen v. Gold Country Casino, 464 F.3d 1044, 1048 (9th Cir. 2006). Thus, the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and leave to amend would be futile. Accordingly, it is recommended that plaintiff's case be dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim. I submit these findings and recommendations to the district judge under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Rule 304 of the Local Rules of Practice for the United States District Court, Eastern District of California. Plaintiff may, within 14 days of the service of the findings and recommendations, file written objections to the findings and recommendations with the court. Such objections should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” The district judge will review the findings and recommendations under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)1)(C). ( q oy — Dated: _ December 2, 2021 JEREMY D. PETERSON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

BENJAMIN COXON, Case No. 2:21-cv-00792-KJM-JDP (PS) Plaintiff, SCREENING ORDER v. ECF No. 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS Defendant. ECF No. 2 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THIS CASE BE DISMISSED OBJECTIONS DUE WITHIN 14 DAYS Plaintiff moves to proceed without prepaying filing fees. ECF No. 2. Plaintiff’s affidavit satisfies the relevant requirements, see 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), and so the motion, ECF No. 2, is granted. Having granted plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis, this complaint is now subject to screening. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). The court must dismiss any action filed in forma pauperis that is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from suit. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). Plaintiff brings this case as an attempt to have crimes investigated and criminal charges brought against unnamed individuals. ECF No. 1. Citizens cannot bring criminal charges or compel the government to bring criminal charges. Further, “criminal statutes . . . do not give rise to civil liability.” Allen v. Gold Country Casino, 464 F.3d 1044, 1048 (9th Cir. 2006). Thus, the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and leave to amend would be futile. Accordingly, it is recommended that plaintiff's case be dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim. I submit these findings and recommendations to the district judge under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Rule 304 of the Local Rules of Practice for the United States District Court, Eastern District of California. Plaintiff may, within 14 days of the service of the findings and recommendations, file written objections to the findings and recommendations with the court. Such objections should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” The district judge will review the findings and recommendations under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)1)(C). ( q oy — Dated: _ December 2, 2021 JEREMY D. PETERSON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

(PS) Coxon v. United States District Court, (E.D. Cal. 2021).

Pincite

(PS) Coxon v. United States District Court ((PS) Coxon v. United States District Court) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related