Windsor

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 GEORGE D. LOCKWOOD, No. 2:24-cv-02761 SCR P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

14 HARRY WINDSOR, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is incarcerated in state prison and proceeding pro se with a civil rights action 18 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff’s complaint is before the undersigned for screening. 28 U.S.C. 19 § 1915A. The complaint, which names current and former heads of state and other public figures 20 as defendants, is incoherent and should be dismissed without leave to amend. Because the 21 complaint is frivolous, the undersigned will also recommend that plaintiff’s request to proceed in 22 forma pauperis be denied. See Tripati v. First Nat. Bank & Tr., 821 F.2d 1368, 1370 (9th Cir. 23 1987) (“A district court may deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis at the outset if it appears 24 from the face of the proposed complaint that the action is frivolous or without merit.”). 25 STATUTORY SCREENING 26…