Blizzard

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 RAGHVENDRA SINGH, No. 2:23-cv-0024 DC SCR PC Plaintiff, v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

THADD A. BLIZZARD, et al., Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Raghvendra Singh is proceeding pro se in this action, which was referred to the undersigned in accordance with Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Pending before the court are Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, and Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”). (ECF Nos. 2, 14.) The court is required to screen complaints brought by parties proceeding in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2); see also Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1129 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc). Plaintiff’s SAC is legally deficient and is also duplicative of other of his actions that this Court has dismissed. Plaintiff has already had two other opportunities to amend his complaint. Accordingly, the undersigned recommends that the SAC…