Greybill v. NaphCare Inc. ( 2024 )

1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 4||Michelle Greybill, as Administrator of the Case No. 2:24-cv-01276-CDS-EJY Estate of John Greybill, 5 Order Plaintiff 6|| Vv. 7||NaphCare Inc., et al., 8 Defendants 10 Plaintiff Michelle Greybill, as administrator of the estate of John Greybill, brings this 11 ||counseled civil-rights action for events that took place during and after John Greybill’s detention 12 ||at the Henderson Detention Center. ECF No. 1. Although this appears to be a conditions-of- 13 ||confinement case, plaintiff is not incarcerated, and she has paid the full $405 filing fee for a civil 14 ||action. See id. As such, this case is not subject to any screening requirements and will proceed onto 15 |[the normal litigation track. See generally 28 U.S.C. § 1915A (the plaintiff is no longer a prisoner 16 || within the meaning of the Prison Litigation Reform Act); see Olivas v. Nevada ex rel. Dep’t of Corr., 856 || F.3d 1281, 1282 (9th Cir. 2017) (holding that “28 U.S.C. § 1915A applies only to claims brought by 18 ||individuals incarcerated at the time they file their complaints”); see Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 19 || 1126, 1129 (9th Cir. 2000) (recognizing that screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) applies to actions 20 || filed in forma pauperis whether or not the plaintiff is incarcerated). 21 For the foregoing reasons, I order that this case is not subject to screening and will 22 ||proceed onto the normal litigation track pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 33 Dated: July 22, 2024 /, / 24 5 Crist Silva mh tates District Judge 26 / 27 28