(PS) Vitaly v. Arcade Creek Recreation Park District

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 KONONOV VITALY, No. 2:24-cv-01743-KJM-SCR Plaintiff, v. ORDER ARCADE CREEK RECREATION PARK DISTRICT, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is proceeding pro se in this action. This matter was accordingly referred to the undersigned by Local Rule 302(c)(21). Plaintiff has filed a request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) and has submitted the affidavit required by that statute. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). The motion to proceed IFP will therefore be granted. However, for the reasons provided below, the Court finds Plaintiff’s complaint is legally deficient but will grant Plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint. I. SCREENING A. Legal Standard The federal IFP statute requires federal courts to dismiss a case if the action is legally “frivolous or malicious,” fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from…