Mauck

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 LARRY LEE JACKS, Case No. 2:25-cv-2651-JDP (P) Plaintiff, v. ORDER A. MAUCK, et al., Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner, brings this section 1983 action and appears to challenge the validity of a state restitution fine levied against him. ECF No. 1 at 3-4, 7. The complaint as articulated does not, for the reasons stated below, state a cognizable claim. I will dismiss the complaint and give plaintiff leave to amend to address the deficiencies identified below. Additionally, I will grant plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis, ECF No. 4. I. Screening and Pleading Requirements A federal court must screen a prisoner’s complaint that seeks relief against a governmental entity, officer, or employee. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The court must identify any cognizable claims and dismiss any portion of the complaint that is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a 27 28 claim upon which…