Havard

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 HANK RICHARD CORONEL, Case No. 2:24-cv-3087-JDP (P) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER; FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

14 HAVARD,

15 Defendant. 16 17 18 Plaintiff, a state inmate proceeding pro se, alleges in his first amended complaint that 19 defendants Sergeant Havard, a correctional officer at California State Prison-Sacramento, and the 20 California Department of Corrections, used excessive force against him in violation of the Eighth 21 Amendment and violated his due process rights by filing a false disciplinary charge against him. 22 ECF No. 10. I recommend that plaintiff’s first amended complaint be dismissed without 23 prejudice because it is evident from the face of the complaint that plaintiff has not exhausted his 24 administrative remedies. 25 Screening and Pleading Requirements 26 A federal court must screen the complaint of any claimant seeking permission to proceed 27 in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). The court must…