“document filed pro se is ‘to be liberally 22 | construed’”
How later courts described this case
- “document filed pro se is ‘to be liberally 22 | construed’”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11 | Junho Hyon, No. 2:19-cv-00259-KJM-EFB
12 Plaintiff, ORDER
13 v.
Jerry Brown, et al.,
1S Defendants.
16
17 This court ordered plaintiff's case be closed on March 12, 2020, ECF No. 21. Plaintiff
18 | subsequently appealed that Order, ECF No. 26. The Ninth Circuit dismissed plaintiff's appeal for
19 | lack of jurisdiction, ECF Nos. 29 & 30. On May 3, 2021, this court denied plaintiff's motion for
20 | clarification, ECF No. 32. Plaintiff moves to dismiss defendants and remand case, ECF No. 35.
21 | See Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007) (“document filed pro se is ‘to be liberally
22 | construed’”) (citations omitted). Given the implausible nature of plaintiff's contentions, see
23 | generally Compl., ECF No. 1, the court DENIES plaintiffs request because it does not appear the
24 | litigation has any merit.
25 This order resolves ECF No. 35.
26 IT IS SO ORDERED.
27 | DATED: May 25, 2021.
28
CHIEF STATES DISTRICT JUDGE