(PS) Cramer v. City of Auburn

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 DAVID WESTON CRAMER, No. 2:24-cv-2235 DJC AC PS Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS CITY OF AUBURN, PLACER COUNTY

SUPERIOR COURT, PLACER COUNTY,

PLACER COUNTY PUBLIC

DEFENDER,

16 Defendants. 17 18 Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se. This matter was accordingly referred to the undersigned by E.D. Cal. 302(c)(21). Plaintiff previously filed a request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) and submitted the affidavit required by that statute. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). That motion was granted, and the initial complaint was rejected pursuant to the screening process discussed below. ECF No. 4. Plaintiff was given leave to amend, and plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint is now before the court for screening. ECF No. 5. I. SCREENING A. Legal Standard The federal IFP statute requires federal courts to dismiss a case if the action is legally “frivolous or malicious,”…